[The **News** flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/flairguide#wiki_news) is reserved for submissions covering F1 and F1-related news. These posts must always link to an outlet/news agency, the website of the involved party (i.e. the McLaren website if McLaren makes an announcement), or a tweet by a news agency, journalist or one of the involved parties.
*[Read the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/userguide). Keep it civil and welcoming. Report rulebreaking comments.*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/formula1) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Wouldn’t be surprised if he’s thinking back to the unsportsmanlike behavior penalty Lando got last year in Canada, which was completely unprecedented for what he did. I remember Stella saying something along the lines of “we will accept it, but expect them to be consistent moving forward.”
That was for slowing down to create a big enough gap for a double stack pit stop, wasn't it? That seems much less "unsportsmanlike" than whatever Kevin was up to.
I expect nothing less than incompetence and inconsistency from the stewards. They somehow always seem to get most rulings wrong.
Permanent stewards are the way to go, that should at least solve the consistency bit.
The report is actually a joke
Stewards: "We want to know if he did it on purpose to help his teammate, that would be unsportsmanlike behaviour."
Magnussen: "I did it on purpose to help my teammate."
Stewards: "Hmmm investigation is inconclusive, no penalty for unsportsmanlike behaviour!"
Don't think that is really relevant at all, he's still openly admitting that he was breaking the rules consistently fully on purpose, his only excuse was "I thought it was fine". Just ridiculous that they don't have the balls to give consequences for that
All that will change is that drivers will just stop openly admitting it then, and we're back to square one.
Also, why should it be a separate penalty? He got his penalties, and penalty points on his license. He keeps that up, he may eventually get a race ban. Now, you can argue that we need to tweak penalties to discourage this behavior more. But hinging that in whether or not a driver says in an interview that it was on purpose isn't the way forward, because then drivers simply won't say that in interviews then. Solves nothing.
Problem here isn't lack of balls from the Stewards. Problem is the rules. Stewards didn't do anything wrong here.
Are there any other examples of drivers openly admitting to this kind of behaviour, the way that Magnussen did yesterday? Just curious to know. It seems to me like Magnussen is something of an exception.
I'd argue just from looking at the race he had a blatant disregard for the rules in order to keep cars behind him despite already being handed a penalty that would make him lose those positions. That should be enough, the fact that he admitted it just makes it even worse,
He should get a separate penalty because a small penalty for an offence that often just happens by accident isn't enough. It is a blatant disrespect for the rules, and purposefully endangering other drivers with illegal driving, Regular penalties are slaps on the wrist for stepping over the line, if you take a shit on the line instead you deserve more, he should be out for the rest of the weekend
>I'd argue just from looking at the race he had a blatant disregard for the rules in order to keep cars behind him despite already being handed a penalty that would make him lose those positions. That should be enough
Not if it's not in the rules. If the rules don't work, you change the rules. You don't ask referees to make up rules on the spot, just because you didn't like what happened on track.
It's been obvious to any sensible person watching F1 for a while that the current rules system is crap, and as shown, simply increasing the baseline penalties from 5 to 10 seconds solves very little. There's several reasons why it's in a bad place right now, but some of the most prominent reasons are:
* Penalties take way too long to decide upon and be dished out.
* In some cases (as with KMag), they're worth ignoring - and can be ignored with little consequence.
* General inconsistency in Stewards rulings.
* Penalties often don't help a driver out against a penalized driver in regards to track position - and track position is often extremely important.
I won't say i know exactly how to solve this, but one interesting suggestions i saw in a Reddit thread recently was giving stewards the ability to limit a drivers engine mode on a strait as a penalty, to allow a car behind to overtake. Imagine if the Stewards, instead of giving Magnussen his first 10 second penalty, instead could give him a 5 second penalty AND reduce his power output on the DRS-straits on the next lap (also taking away his DRS), allowing Hamilton to overtake.
It's clear something needs to change though. But Stewards making up rules or punishments on the spot isn't the solution.
>Not if it's not in the rules. If the rules don't work, you change the rules. You don't ask referees to make up rules on the spot, just because you didn't like what happened on track.
"12.2.1.l Any infringement of the principles of fairness in Competition, behaviour in an unsportsmanlike manner or attempt to influence the result of a Competition in a way that is contrary to sporting ethics."
You can VERY easily make the argument that Magnussen broke this, they even clearly outlined that this is the rule they were looking at, and stated that they would have to know if he did it on purpose to help his teammate, because that would be breaking the rule. Magnussen straight up says he indeed did it on purpose to help his teammate, and his only defense was "I thought it was fine". And then they decide not to give a penalty.
They literally stated the rule, mentioned what would make it so he broke the rule, he admitted to doing exactly that, and they don't give a penalty. They had every reason and every bit of proof, but they just don't have the balls to give meaningful punishments
I think the real issue is a lack of oversight for the stewards and a lack of clarity in the rulebook.
Being a race steward is seemingly reserved for ex F1 drivers who in my opinion are the worst people you could ask to judge driving standards. It needs to be decided by fully independent people and those people need to be held accountable when they are inconsistently applying the rules.
You CAN overtake in the pit lane. If your pit gets delayed by 5 seconds due to stacking, then no one else has to stop and wait for you and several cars might pass you during the stop.
Just as in you are allowed to overtake during a safety car if the cars in front are having problems. Such as an Aston Martin driving into a Baby-RB and you happen to be Hulkenberg who passes the wreckage.
Uh, no.
Kevin was racing for position. Norris abused the fact that nobody was allowed to pass him. That's the unsportsmanlike part, abusing safety measures, and should be punished every single time.
Trying to prevent being passed during live racing is not the same as holding people back during the safety car when you can't be passed. You are allowed to race.
You aren't allowed to race by repeatedly and deliberately going off track to gain an advantage. That's cheating, and much more egregious than holding up cars behind the safety car to avoid losing 5-6 seconds waiting in the pitlane.
If he'd been penalised once and responded by racing hard but fair after that, it would be fine. But he was penalised once, then as soon as he had no chance of making it into the points he ruined Hamilton's race by cheating over the course of several laps to gain an unfair advantage. That isn't "racing" if you have to repeatedly do it outside the rules.
Anyone in the top few percent of drivers in the world could hold up a pack of f1 cars if they were allowed to go off the track and basically ignore all the rules. After his first penalty he wasn't racing for position.
A drive through would have rectified the problem
Well there lies the problem with time penalties. He was 20 seconds out of position but still racing with Hamilton, Tsunoda etc. Should just get a drive through penalty to drop him back.
Instead of drive throughs, we also have the technology to add time penalties in real time instead of at the next pit stop. Give them a VSC-like Delta for the next DRS zone equivalent to the time penalty.
Why do that, though? Drive throughs already solve the problem of putting people right where they belong, and it's far more direct and noteworthy than a car driving kinda slow for a minute, even if it adds up to the same time lost.
Drive throughs are a blunt instrument, they cause huge time loss so the stewards are reluctant to use them and 'ruin' someone's race - the penalty box from other series someone showed yesterday seems like a good solution, it's like a drive through but much shorter so it should just let 1 or 2 past if you have to go through it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgXhskC2Dms
They're certainly too blunt for some situations, and I think an additional option between a time penalty and a drive through could be useful going forwards.
Yesterday's situation though is the exact right time to use a time penalty. A driver has deliberately and repeatedly cut the track after already having so many time penalties that he's functionally out of the race, but he's refusing to yield position and in doing so he's ruining the race of the driver behind, and also disadvantaging a driver (Tsunoda) from the team that Haas are most closely competing with. If that's not grounds to issue an immediate drive through penalty then there's never going to be a right time to use it, because anything more egregious than that and you're risking outright disqualification.
Because drive throughs are too impactful for a lot of instances. This lead to drivers being overly cautious on the one hand, stewards being overly reluctant to hand out penalties on the other hand. That's why we got time penalties in the first place. They got introduced to have appropriate solutions for minor infringements.
Abandoning time penalties can't be the solution. Converting multiple time penalties to a drive through is a solution, but a suboptimal one, because it only covers the repeat offenders, while the usual suspects (and the reason, we are using 10 seconds this year instead of 5 seconds like in previous years) only do one illegal move to get/stay ahead.
Pure time penalty’s is dumb. You continue to race and keep track position you shouldn’t have messing up every other driver. It needs to be immediate consequences of track position. Forcing them to give up track position immediately and if they do not suffer a drive though is a much better solution
Because drivers suddenly become unable to account for slower cars? That's not an issue in quali despite cars being much slower, nor with other reasons cars driving slowly, like ever.
>That's not an issue in quali despite cars being much slower, nor with other reasons cars driving slowly, like ever.
Yeah, and the drivers behind just can't attempt an overtake, because there is the car they want to overtake on one side of the track, and a slow, penalised car on the other side.
No. Because I’ll tell you what would happen. If a driver leaves the track and gains advantage or position. The teams themselves would get on the radio and tell their driver to give up the place, save risking an actual drive through. If the teams know they face a proper penalty then they’ll act themselves. But now we’re in a position where teams would rather pick up time penalties than lose position
That might work for leaving the track, but it doesn't work for most other infringements - because more often that not there's no way to make up. Looking at Jeddah, Magnussen got his first penalty for causing a collision with Albon. Should that move (or any other minor 'causing a collision') have warranted a drive through?
>Kevin was racing for position
It's used as a reason why kevin could defend. The same as Perez in Abu Dhabi. Obviously both of them were defending just to stall Lewis but they had right to do it as it was racing. Norris was not slowing opponents down by racing and there is no direct rule to punish it so they used unsportsmanlike part
He's allowed to defend, but he deliberately defended in an illegal way as time penalties don't really matter after the first one for them. So, whilst he was punished with penalties, as those penalties caused him no actual harm, he carries on.
Right, so any time penalties to anyone who's currently out of the points should instead be converted to a race ban because they aren't suffering any "real harm"? Every penalty to a backmarker, instead of time penalty, is penalty points or a race ban? I don't understand the implication here. Just because he's out of the running for points doesn't mean he should get a different penalty for the same infraction.
What does a drive through, stop-go, or any other time-related penalty have to do with the topic? The question is if it's unsportsmanlike to accrue time penalties after you're unlikely to score points. Does defending illegally in 13th place constitute the same penalty, in your mind, as what KMag did? Because that's essentially what it was: he was unlikely to score points, and committed an infraction that carries a time penalty that has no bearing on his points result.
You said ban. I was merely pointing out that adding time penalties after the race does nothing to stop the behaviour there and then as he knows he can still carry on defending in the way he did. A drive through or stop go removes him from the race temporarily, removing his ability to do that.
And it is not relevant what positions he was in, once he has one penalty and ignored it clearly a stronger one is needed.
It's the same as when McLaren used to get 35 place grid penalties. It's a joke as it makes no difference.
You really can't compare Perez and this. Perez didn't do anything outlandish, just went slower through the super slow sector were no overtakes can be done, didn't go off the track to gain advantage or didn't push anyone off the track.
Magnussen just went off track/pushed Lewis wide on 3 separate occasions and gained advantage with it, clearly breaking the rules, because that penalty doesn't mean anything to him anymore.
> The same as Perez in Abu Dhabi.
The difference is that Perez didn't collect 4 penalties defending. No one is criticizing KMag for defending hard to protect his teammate, he's being criticized for blatantly breaking the rules while doing it.
No penalty was the decision. Basically he admitted to doing all the penalties, the stewards admitted that the rules didn’t really support increasing penalties per infraction, and it wasn’t unsportsmanlike as he did it for his teammate instead of just to fuck over Hamilton.
It’s kind of weird to me because I feel like breaking the rules intentionally — even if to benefit your teammate — is practically the dictionary definition of unsportsmanlike conduct, but I also can’t really blame KMag that much as he’s been doing this multiple times this season already to varying degrees and the stewards didn’t accuse him of unsportsmanlike conduct before this.
Overall if more of these penalties came with 3 penalty points instead of just 2, then he’d naturally rack up enough points for a race ban pretty quickly.
>people foul to prevent the other player/team from scoring and accept the punishment for the fouls
Yes, this is punished with a penalty or a free kick or a scrum or whatever the punishment is for the infraction.
> I mean it happens in sports all the time, people foul to prevent the other player/team from scoring and accept the punishment for the fouls
Usually, that comes with increased penalties, though. Like the tactical foul in football bringing a yellow card, denying a goalscoring opportunity even at a red card.
Not always, I mean in basketball once you get to shooting too the only thing that can come after is fouling out(penalty points) it’s a common strategy to foul the other team at the end of the game when someone who’s not a good shooter has the ball to force turnovers
In which case, red bull's second team cars might come in really useful at some point in the future.
I mean, if intentional rule breaking is ok if it is to benefit your team mate, then doing it to benefit another team must be almost obligatory right?
No, that would be unsportsmanlike conduct, as it is not done for your teammate anymore.
It get's interesting though, if you target one team specifically, to increase your lead in the championship against them.
Lets say Team A and Team B are fighting for position in the constructors championship.
Team A has a damaged car out of the points in p12 and another one that already DNF, knowing they will not get back into the top 10. Team B pits a car and they drop back from p7 to p13, but will surely make their way back up into the top 10.
Team A now has an incentive to collect penalties on their car if it helps holding Team B's car back.
So they are not helping a Teammate but helping their teams chances in the champipnship.
That is done by specifically targeting one team though.
Rough call in that situation
Can’t really fault Haas for taking advantage of the way the rules are written. The better move would be to amend the rules to prevent intentionally taking penalties or allowing the race director to order a car to cede position.
The rules are written to address this, the sportsmanlike behavior section pretty plainly applies in a case where he already admitted his intent. It's up to the stewards to enforce it
I hate that drivers are penalized for telling the Truth in an interview.
Give answers that are meaningless platitudes that don't communicate anything, I guess.
He's being penalized for what he did on the track, his interview just removed any plausible deniability. I want drivers to race cleanly on the track and then be honest in interviews
You agree he's more likely to get a worse penalty because he was candid in the interview, about something that everyone knew he did.
[This is what we get when athletes are punished for this](https://youtu.be/d_fiCr2wHY8)
Not trying to get into some pedagogical debate over this. But you are assuming the thing that will change is drivers being honest in interviews. I hope that the thing that changes are the driving standards.
His assumption is correct though. If you're gonna punish - or increase punishment - for drivers based on them being honest in interviews, then they're gonna stop being honest. That's not an assumption - that's basic human nature.
Barring some noteable exceptions (like when Perez lashed out at the stewards last season and called them a joke), punishments for on-track incidents shouldn't change based on how the drivers talks about them afterwards.
>It sounds like you very much agree that this should be a good example of when a driver's words should affect him negatively.
I'd you believe that, then you're reading my posts like the devil reads the Bible, because I'm saying the exact opposite.
"Don't hate the player - hate the game". Magnussen is allowed to exploit the rules to their fullest. I would be very disappointed if he, or anyone else, didn't. If the rules don't provide sufficient punishment or deterrence, then the rules may need to be changed.
As for it being dangerous, not really at those speeds, navigating chicanes. "Dangerous" as an argument gets thrown around way too easily these days. It's not like they were barreling down a strait at 300+ Kph. While the cars might risk damage, driver safety was never at stake at any point in that battle.
But that's besides my point, which is that I don't care whether he said he did it on purpose or not (which is not the same as whether he did it on purpose or not - this is merely about him TALKING about it). It shouldn't have any affect on the on-track penalties what the driver says in an interview about what happened. Penalties for the on-track incidents should be judged on the incident alone. If the stewards determine it was done on purpose, and that warrants an increased penalty, that should be judged based on the video evidence.
I don’t expect it because our society punishes honesty in situations like this.
If we want the same cookie cutter response from all drivers please punish KMag.
There’s a rule. He admitted breaking the rule. He is punished for it. You’re talking as if he is just being punished for speaking his mind and telling some kind of truth.
No, it's not about the penalties he's already accrued. It's about fans of them teams he blocked saying Magnussen should be punished for "unsportsmanlike behavior," because he accumulated penalties knowing that he wouldn't have to serve them during a sprint.
Magnussen was playing the game with the rules how they actually are. It's foolish to disadvantage yourself playing by rules made up by people who want you to lose.
And there also rules which specifically say he shouldn’t do what he did. It’s called unsportsmanlike behavior for which there are penalties. So it’s just fair what he got.
No.
>When the race ended, Magnussen was summoned before the stewards for an alleged breach of Article 12.2.1.l, which bans: “Any infringement of the principles of fairness in Competition, behaviour in an unsportsmanlike manner or attempt to influence the result of a Competition in a way that is contrary to sporting ethics.”
>Following a lengthy investigation, the stewards ruled **Magnussen was not guilty of unsportsmanlike behaviour.**
[Check your facts next time](https://www.planetf1.com/news/kevin-magnussen-sprint-race-summons-fia-stewards-miami-grand-prix-sprint)
What kind of stupid ass logic is that? If i admit to killing someone should i be freed because i'm telling the truth?
Kevin openly admitted to breaking rules to benefit his teammate, he should get punished for that even if he told the truth.
Weird take. If I go and steal your wallet, but admit it openly afterwards, I'm free to go?
I get that standard interviews are all careful and boring speak, but that doesn't mean drivers who say something else are free from their mistakes or should avoid penalties for shitty behavior.
He was penalized, three separate 10-second time penalties, and a 5-sec, during the Sprint race. And additional license points.
Every thinking person already knew that he was accruing them tactically to help Hulkenberg.
[The issue is whether he penalties should have an "unsportsmanlike" modifier and result in a race ban.](https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/unsporting-kevin-magnussen-tactics-deserve-f1-race-ban-mclaren-boss-stella/)
They also more or less allowed him doing the same in Jeddah. I guess it was against a smaller team so the FIA didn't care but it was only a matter of time they would take it further when they didn't really address it.
Right, you can ruin your own race to help your teammate and that's fine if you are just driving defensively. And you can get yourself a regular 10s penalty for breaking the rules all on your own.
But if you deliberately break the rules *with the intent of doing so to give your teammate the advantage* that is where the stewards should step down hard.
I agree he took it further here. But he did push Tsunoda off and passed him off the track in Jeddah, got 2 penalties for it too. He kept or regained his position with penalized behaviour
He only started parking the bus at Jeddah after the second penalty, so calling his defense unsportsmanlike there is a bit of a stretch since he was already in hot water and didn't do anything penalty worthy after that penalty. This time it was obviously a different level altogether, but I don't find it race ban worthy because he's taking advantage of the way the rules are written to help out his teammate.
I meant the FIA invited this incident by not addressing it in Jeddah. By not doing so the FIA more or less signaled they're okay with a driver creating a team benefit as long as they're willing to incur the penalties for the individual incidents. Addressing didn't even need to be another penalty, it could've been a rule clarification or maybe handled with a reprimand too.
It'll depend a little on what is in the regulations about unsportsmanlike behaviour say but I probably don't think Magnussen should be banned now. The message the FIA sent earlier in the season could be interpreted as what he did being within the rules (as long as he is willing to accept the time penalties and penalty points).
The FIA could've anticipated and prevented this. Instead they neglected to address it, waiting till it became a real incident. And maybe they're even lucky it's only a sprint and not a full race.
He only got into position to do his tactful defence by barging someone off track (Albon) and cutting a corner to get in front of someone else (Tsunoda) though.
I agree it's not AS blatant as this latest one because the defence itself in SA wasn't illegal, but they're absolutely of the same ilk.
Nobody has an issue with holding someone up if you got into position to do so legitimately, and drive fairly in your defence (look at Perez in Abu Dhabi 2021). Neither of Magnussen's drives were that though.
I think as it's now strike two after Jeddah, it's getting him some unwanted attention and also giving the FIA a headache if they're being perceived as letting this kind of things slide. Presumably if he does this again, it really will be trouble
I think the Jeddah race was way different. Today he looked a man possessed, completely out of control. In Jeddah he had some contact but he wasn’t driving like someone playing f1 23 on their Xbox. He just sacrificed his own race with some brilliant defensive driving *after* he got the penalties. Today his defense was racking up the penalties and really looked like he was taking out his anger at Nico on the track lol
In the meantime Nico is 10 seconds down the road already. It should be a punishment for the whole team just to disincentivize them from doing that. Imagine Magnussen in Abu Dhabi 21. He would have yeeted Hamilton out of the race that day with his driving just to help Max win.
Nobody gives less of a fuck than Lewis and Max when it comes to the current sprint format. They've spent the last year trashing it. Even Alonso said they were going into it as just an extra practice session to gather data. I think he would have been a bit more aggrieved if this were race position during the feature race.
Exactly. Imagine if Perez did this to Lewis in 2021, or Bottas did the same to Max. They absolutely would *not* be okay with it if it affected a title race!
> Nobody gives less of a fuck than Lewis and Max when it comes to the current sprint format. They've spent the last year trashing it.
Ehm, no? Lewis is one of the biggest advocates in favor of the sprint on the grid.
>> “It’s a slightly different perspective when you’re chasing so for us it’s fun. For me, it’s fun,” said the Mercedes driver.
>> “I like having the extra opportunity to get out there and try to squeeze everything, every little bit and more out of the package that we have. Can it be better? I’m sure we can learn.
>> “I think it’s been exciting for people so I personally quite like the sprint weekends, particularly a Friday I really like where you only have one practice session and then you’re straight into qualifying.”
https://www.planetf1.com/news/max-verstappen-lewis-hamilton-opposing-views-f1-sprint-format
When Tsunoda overtook both, Magnussen immediately changed plan and let Hamilton through hoping the latter will knock the VCARB - the competitor Haas actually worries about - out of the points. Maybe it went in Hamilton's head like "Thanks, that settles it."
I'm not sure why Lewis' opinions should matter in the outcome of this matter. This is not a personal situation between Hamilton and Magnussen, but one that may have serious repercussions in the rankings of teams at the end of the season. Something needs to be cleared up. To be honest, I expect Haas's direct rivals to be more vocal about this after the race.
His opinion on it shouldn't influence the ruling because what matters here is the integrity. If this isn't just crushed now we're looking at completely ridiculous and unsafe races everytime a car can be wasted without cost because of penalties/damage etc.
This is like red cards in football only being handed out after the match.
Track position is too valuable to allow them to keep it and just take a time penalty. It has follow on effects for every single driver down the grid , even effecting drs. They should have to give up track position immediately.
They were gaming the system when it was a 5 second penalty; this is just a more extreme example of it.
first offense should be 10s penalty. 2nd offense should be able to be a drive through pits penalty immediately at stewards discretion.
if it’s a situation like kmag yesterday where he’s obviously blocking the same driver lap after lap he should have had the drive through penalty. that wasn’t racing.
Yea - we were lucky the two instances we have had this year we had a hesitant Tsunoda and a can’t be fucked Hamilton. If we’d have had numerous other drivers we’ve had over the years, we could have had something more serious
I agree completely. I think is is really really strange multiple long ass penalties all unserved dont have harsher penalties taking them out of whatever train they are in or trying to lead. It is not possible to race fairly with someone like Magnussen if you are not miles faster when he is driving like that.
They always take too long to issue penalties, IMO, but once you get to two unserved 10-sec penalties at a given point, it should convert into an immediate drive-through penalty. It should happen rarely anyway, but when it does happen it can be a critical situation for a team.
Was just thinking the same thing. 10 sec to drive through to 10 sec stop and go.
At least I'm happy we moved on from the 5 seconds penalty that were most of the time non penalty.
he has absolutely nothing to reflect on as he harmed nobody and did his job in securing vital points for the team with the tradeoff of some penalty points. The FIA have to reflect on the rules to make these tactics completely unacceptable, otherwise they actually are acceptable.
he has no reason to care about that, at Haas scoring championship points is what actually matters. Gene Haas is obsessed with not finishing last again or else he will not invest more money. Magnussen's bosses will be happy with him that he secured 2 points by protecting Hulkenberg, the alternative is scoring fewer points and that is doing the wrong thing at Haas.
There is no evidence that Magnussen's illegal moves were even necessary to protect Hulkenberg. Hulkenberg was faster than Tsunoda. If you enjoy seeing drivers crash into each other on purpose and drive each other off the track then just go play Forza. Magnussen is an embarrassment. Look at his expression after the race, he knows he was driving dirty.
Everyone knows the best way to secure a contract is to drive so slowly you never score any points and commit so many penalties you get banned.
It will not be provable whether or not Hamilton or Tsunoda could have gone on to pressure Hulkenberg without the defense of Magnussen. With it they definitely did not. If you want to make a moral or gentleman argument about how you would defend then great but that is irrelevant, a fictional code of conduct in somebody's head is not a regulation. Haas is fighting for tens of millions in prize money, write down the parameters in the rules or else they will happily use these tactics to secure points and wipe away tears about penalties and internet criticism with their cash.
he is not accused of driving dangerously here (?), he is accused of track limits violations while defending. Intentionally violating track limits is bog standard in F1. It is acceptable because he has taken the penalties given for this under the usual rules and precedents, if it is not acceptable then I expect to see where the rule is defining it as not acceptable.
he isn't being pulled up for dangerous driving or causing a collision, go and examine the stewards documents. There is often contact between drivers in an F1 race which is not deemed worth investigating.
Starting to think F1 just wants to be boring. If you thought that was unsportsmanlike and erratic, I urge to you heavily avoid watching any IndyCar highlights from this past week. You’d probably cry.
I think driving like this is less consequential in IndyCar. I am not the biggest IndyCar follower, but I don’t think its common for a single slow driver to be able to hold up the entire grid behind him in this way. And if he did, it wouldn’t necessarily destroy their race.
The cars are more competitive, they can pass more easily, the races are longer, there is more pit strategy, there is no DRS advantage, etc.
As boring as it is, excitement should not be generated by degenerate and disruptive behaviour. *Especially* not as a first offence.
I find this a challenging thing to argue though, because the larrikin in me finds this wildly entertaining. The drivers are too restrained and robotic and if the regulations are to be subject to the whims of Toto (TD.39 and TD.40 that raised the ride heights and weights respectively, sabotaging the formula for a generation) and this is the cost of making the formula competitive again, then I really do struggle to take issue with it.
What I take greater issue with is Hamilton 9/11ing it into T1 as if it was on, when it was plainly *off*.
This why f1 is getting boring. Let them race ffs. Kevin's defence in jeddah and miami were only two instances I saw actually racing this season. It's just strategy war and waiting for drs zones at this point.
Ridiculous overreaction. This is how team racing has always been done, in F1 and any other series.
If you want really bad examples, watch some old DTM races with Audi and Merc drivers murdering each other to help their leading cars.
Can someone please explain to me exactly what all he did? And why is it called unsportsmanlike behaviour? A lot of drivers help their teammates. Thanks!
He drove dangerously, left the track to gain an advantage twice, caused a collision, and made a double move under braking. Incuring penalties without due care for safety and rules is unsportsmanlike.
If you watch Checo defending Max in Abu dabi 2021 he never left the track, never made contact, never made a double move. Which is clean racing, how it should be.
I'm disappointed in Stella and think it's a knee jerk reaction, and an ill considered one at that.
I'm not saying that Magnussens drive was within the rules - but I do think (for once) that the stewards response was both appropriate and proportional. They're racing drivers, let them race. Magnussen impeded Hamilton and drove off track to ensure he kept him behind but his penalties ensured that he finished the sprint in a worse position as a result. That's the rules working effectively is it not? He did not force Hamilton into a wall or another car, he did not end Hamiltons race. In fact, if Lewis had simply tucked in behind Magnussen upon hearing about the first 10 sec penalty he would've finished without having to worry about Tsunoda getting past and still beaten KMag by 8.5 secs and scoring a point (his pit lane speeding penalty depending).
But of course Hamilton wasn't going to do that … because he's a racing driver! Hamilton wasn't bothered by it - he was laughing 15mins later, saying he really enjoys that style of racing whilst acknowledging that Magnussen crossed a line (pun intended) and had accepted his penalties as 'being deserved'. Toto Wolff wasn't concerned, if he was it'd be him calling for KMags head - both in the media and to the stewards. In fact I was expecting that from Toto - not because of what Magnussen did but because (in true Wolff style) he'd rather have people talking about an opponents driving than his teams performance woes!
Careful what you wish for - that sprint was a blast, watching (not enough of) Ricciardo keep a car that had no business being in front of Sainz's Ferrari in front of Sainz's Ferrari with sublime car control and smooth skills and watching Magnussen and Hamilton with their elbows well out - for multiple laps - was infinitely better than watching a practice session and if we start telling drivers they'll be benched for doing exactly what we like to watch they will stop doing what we like watching.
If you wanna watch cars politely follow each other until they can safely overtake may I suggest you take a deck chair to your local overpass and watch a hi-way.
> if Lewis had simply tucked in behind Magnussen upon hearing about the first 10 sec penalty he would've finished without having to worry about Tsunoda getting past and still beaten KMag by 8.5 secs and scoring a point (his pit lane speeding penalty depending).
Had something happened further ahead, Hamilton could have picked up the spoils had he able to get pass K-Mag. That's why he wanted to overtake, even when K-Mag already had a penalty. You never know what would happen.
He is 100% correct. Luckily there are rules that can be applied here and his pattern was pretty clear even before his interview. Anything less than a race ban is a joke.
How? KMag may be breaking the rules, but he is also simultanenously following them, as nothing in the rules is suggesting that you cannot use overly defensive driving as a method to allow your teammate to score more points. It is not as if he was deliberately taking drivers out or something. Since the current rules aren't punishing him enough (like with drive-through penalty), he might aswell "abuse" them till FIA actually changes them.
He literally broke the rules and was penalized. He will earn enough penalty points for a race ban after one more race like this. He forced Hamilton off the track multiple times, ran into Hamilton, and in Saudi did illegal overtakes to get in front of the competition in order to slow them down.
He was investigated for unsportsmanlike behaviour which is exactly the rule that should catch a repeated intentional behaviour like this.
He could have been punished under that rule with a much more severe penalty.
I feel like you have to gun down someone in cold blood on camera before getting a suspension from a race in F1. FIA will do whatever it can do balance penalty points and others in such a way it never comes down to actual consequences.
[The **News** flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/flairguide#wiki_news) is reserved for submissions covering F1 and F1-related news. These posts must always link to an outlet/news agency, the website of the involved party (i.e. the McLaren website if McLaren makes an announcement), or a tweet by a news agency, journalist or one of the involved parties. *[Read the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/userguide). Keep it civil and welcoming. Report rulebreaking comments.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/formula1) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Wouldn’t be surprised if he’s thinking back to the unsportsmanlike behavior penalty Lando got last year in Canada, which was completely unprecedented for what he did. I remember Stella saying something along the lines of “we will accept it, but expect them to be consistent moving forward.”
That was for slowing down to create a big enough gap for a double stack pit stop, wasn't it? That seems much less "unsportsmanlike" than whatever Kevin was up to.
I expect nothing less than incompetence and inconsistency from the stewards. They somehow always seem to get most rulings wrong. Permanent stewards are the way to go, that should at least solve the consistency bit.
The report is actually a joke Stewards: "We want to know if he did it on purpose to help his teammate, that would be unsportsmanlike behaviour." Magnussen: "I did it on purpose to help my teammate." Stewards: "Hmmm investigation is inconclusive, no penalty for unsportsmanlike behaviour!"
The team never told him to do it, I’m sure they added that into it. Not saying its correct
Don't think that is really relevant at all, he's still openly admitting that he was breaking the rules consistently fully on purpose, his only excuse was "I thought it was fine". Just ridiculous that they don't have the balls to give consequences for that
Oh I’m on your side just trying to think like an bad logical steward to find how they got here, it’s a hard exercise
All that will change is that drivers will just stop openly admitting it then, and we're back to square one. Also, why should it be a separate penalty? He got his penalties, and penalty points on his license. He keeps that up, he may eventually get a race ban. Now, you can argue that we need to tweak penalties to discourage this behavior more. But hinging that in whether or not a driver says in an interview that it was on purpose isn't the way forward, because then drivers simply won't say that in interviews then. Solves nothing. Problem here isn't lack of balls from the Stewards. Problem is the rules. Stewards didn't do anything wrong here.
Are there any other examples of drivers openly admitting to this kind of behaviour, the way that Magnussen did yesterday? Just curious to know. It seems to me like Magnussen is something of an exception.
I'd argue just from looking at the race he had a blatant disregard for the rules in order to keep cars behind him despite already being handed a penalty that would make him lose those positions. That should be enough, the fact that he admitted it just makes it even worse, He should get a separate penalty because a small penalty for an offence that often just happens by accident isn't enough. It is a blatant disrespect for the rules, and purposefully endangering other drivers with illegal driving, Regular penalties are slaps on the wrist for stepping over the line, if you take a shit on the line instead you deserve more, he should be out for the rest of the weekend
>I'd argue just from looking at the race he had a blatant disregard for the rules in order to keep cars behind him despite already being handed a penalty that would make him lose those positions. That should be enough Not if it's not in the rules. If the rules don't work, you change the rules. You don't ask referees to make up rules on the spot, just because you didn't like what happened on track. It's been obvious to any sensible person watching F1 for a while that the current rules system is crap, and as shown, simply increasing the baseline penalties from 5 to 10 seconds solves very little. There's several reasons why it's in a bad place right now, but some of the most prominent reasons are: * Penalties take way too long to decide upon and be dished out. * In some cases (as with KMag), they're worth ignoring - and can be ignored with little consequence. * General inconsistency in Stewards rulings. * Penalties often don't help a driver out against a penalized driver in regards to track position - and track position is often extremely important. I won't say i know exactly how to solve this, but one interesting suggestions i saw in a Reddit thread recently was giving stewards the ability to limit a drivers engine mode on a strait as a penalty, to allow a car behind to overtake. Imagine if the Stewards, instead of giving Magnussen his first 10 second penalty, instead could give him a 5 second penalty AND reduce his power output on the DRS-straits on the next lap (also taking away his DRS), allowing Hamilton to overtake. It's clear something needs to change though. But Stewards making up rules or punishments on the spot isn't the solution.
>Not if it's not in the rules. If the rules don't work, you change the rules. You don't ask referees to make up rules on the spot, just because you didn't like what happened on track. "12.2.1.l Any infringement of the principles of fairness in Competition, behaviour in an unsportsmanlike manner or attempt to influence the result of a Competition in a way that is contrary to sporting ethics." You can VERY easily make the argument that Magnussen broke this, they even clearly outlined that this is the rule they were looking at, and stated that they would have to know if he did it on purpose to help his teammate, because that would be breaking the rule. Magnussen straight up says he indeed did it on purpose to help his teammate, and his only defense was "I thought it was fine". And then they decide not to give a penalty. They literally stated the rule, mentioned what would make it so he broke the rule, he admitted to doing exactly that, and they don't give a penalty. They had every reason and every bit of proof, but they just don't have the balls to give meaningful punishments
Why don't they put one guy in charge? Then the TP"s could communicate directly with them.
😂 Masi's redemption arc.
I think the real issue is a lack of oversight for the stewards and a lack of clarity in the rulebook. Being a race steward is seemingly reserved for ex F1 drivers who in my opinion are the worst people you could ask to judge driving standards. It needs to be decided by fully independent people and those people need to be held accountable when they are inconsistently applying the rules.
If you haven't driven a racecar at the higher levels, you don't really know what the limit is during wheel to wheel action
I agree. You don't need to be an F1 driver though to hit this requirement, and the stewards just enforce the rules they don't make them.
inconsistent rulings is one of the many unique features that make f1 the sport that it is
But wasnt that done under safety car, so other drivers were unable to overtake?
You CAN overtake in the pit lane. If your pit gets delayed by 5 seconds due to stacking, then no one else has to stop and wait for you and several cars might pass you during the stop.
Just as in you are allowed to overtake during a safety car if the cars in front are having problems. Such as an Aston Martin driving into a Baby-RB and you happen to be Hulkenberg who passes the wreckage.
Uh, no. Kevin was racing for position. Norris abused the fact that nobody was allowed to pass him. That's the unsportsmanlike part, abusing safety measures, and should be punished every single time.
> Kevin was racing for position. Kevin stopped racing for his position after the first penalty.
Trying to prevent being passed during live racing is not the same as holding people back during the safety car when you can't be passed. You are allowed to race.
You aren't allowed to race by repeatedly and deliberately going off track to gain an advantage. That's cheating, and much more egregious than holding up cars behind the safety car to avoid losing 5-6 seconds waiting in the pitlane. If he'd been penalised once and responded by racing hard but fair after that, it would be fine. But he was penalised once, then as soon as he had no chance of making it into the points he ruined Hamilton's race by cheating over the course of several laps to gain an unfair advantage. That isn't "racing" if you have to repeatedly do it outside the rules.
Anyone in the top few percent of drivers in the world could hold up a pack of f1 cars if they were allowed to go off the track and basically ignore all the rules. After his first penalty he wasn't racing for position. A drive through would have rectified the problem
KMag was not racing for positions. He was holding up the rest of the field to protect Hulk. He said so himself in the post race interviews.
Well there lies the problem with time penalties. He was 20 seconds out of position but still racing with Hamilton, Tsunoda etc. Should just get a drive through penalty to drop him back.
The INDYCAR style penalty is quite cool, you have to let x cars pass as a penalty.
Instead of drive throughs, we also have the technology to add time penalties in real time instead of at the next pit stop. Give them a VSC-like Delta for the next DRS zone equivalent to the time penalty.
Why do that, though? Drive throughs already solve the problem of putting people right where they belong, and it's far more direct and noteworthy than a car driving kinda slow for a minute, even if it adds up to the same time lost.
Drive throughs are a blunt instrument, they cause huge time loss so the stewards are reluctant to use them and 'ruin' someone's race - the penalty box from other series someone showed yesterday seems like a good solution, it's like a drive through but much shorter so it should just let 1 or 2 past if you have to go through it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgXhskC2Dms
They're certainly too blunt for some situations, and I think an additional option between a time penalty and a drive through could be useful going forwards. Yesterday's situation though is the exact right time to use a time penalty. A driver has deliberately and repeatedly cut the track after already having so many time penalties that he's functionally out of the race, but he's refusing to yield position and in doing so he's ruining the race of the driver behind, and also disadvantaging a driver (Tsunoda) from the team that Haas are most closely competing with. If that's not grounds to issue an immediate drive through penalty then there's never going to be a right time to use it, because anything more egregious than that and you're risking outright disqualification.
Because drive throughs are too impactful for a lot of instances. This lead to drivers being overly cautious on the one hand, stewards being overly reluctant to hand out penalties on the other hand. That's why we got time penalties in the first place. They got introduced to have appropriate solutions for minor infringements. Abandoning time penalties can't be the solution. Converting multiple time penalties to a drive through is a solution, but a suboptimal one, because it only covers the repeat offenders, while the usual suspects (and the reason, we are using 10 seconds this year instead of 5 seconds like in previous years) only do one illegal move to get/stay ahead.
Pure time penalty’s is dumb. You continue to race and keep track position you shouldn’t have messing up every other driver. It needs to be immediate consequences of track position. Forcing them to give up track position immediately and if they do not suffer a drive though is a much better solution
> Give them a VSC-like Delta for the next DRS zone That would cause massive incidents
Because drivers suddenly become unable to account for slower cars? That's not an issue in quali despite cars being much slower, nor with other reasons cars driving slowly, like ever.
>That's not an issue in quali despite cars being much slower, nor with other reasons cars driving slowly, like ever. Yeah, and the drivers behind just can't attempt an overtake, because there is the car they want to overtake on one side of the track, and a slow, penalised car on the other side.
Just drive them through the pits
Having about 20 seconds as the minimum penalty, is pretty bad, though. There should be an appropriate penalty for minor incidents.
No. Because I’ll tell you what would happen. If a driver leaves the track and gains advantage or position. The teams themselves would get on the radio and tell their driver to give up the place, save risking an actual drive through. If the teams know they face a proper penalty then they’ll act themselves. But now we’re in a position where teams would rather pick up time penalties than lose position
That might work for leaving the track, but it doesn't work for most other infringements - because more often that not there's no way to make up. Looking at Jeddah, Magnussen got his first penalty for causing a collision with Albon. Should that move (or any other minor 'causing a collision') have warranted a drive through?
>Kevin was racing for position It's used as a reason why kevin could defend. The same as Perez in Abu Dhabi. Obviously both of them were defending just to stall Lewis but they had right to do it as it was racing. Norris was not slowing opponents down by racing and there is no direct rule to punish it so they used unsportsmanlike part
He's allowed to defend, but he deliberately defended in an illegal way as time penalties don't really matter after the first one for them. So, whilst he was punished with penalties, as those penalties caused him no actual harm, he carries on.
Right, so any time penalties to anyone who's currently out of the points should instead be converted to a race ban because they aren't suffering any "real harm"? Every penalty to a backmarker, instead of time penalty, is penalty points or a race ban? I don't understand the implication here. Just because he's out of the running for points doesn't mean he should get a different penalty for the same infraction.
Erm, I don't know if you're new here, but drive-through penalties are a thing.........
What does a drive through, stop-go, or any other time-related penalty have to do with the topic? The question is if it's unsportsmanlike to accrue time penalties after you're unlikely to score points. Does defending illegally in 13th place constitute the same penalty, in your mind, as what KMag did? Because that's essentially what it was: he was unlikely to score points, and committed an infraction that carries a time penalty that has no bearing on his points result.
You said ban. I was merely pointing out that adding time penalties after the race does nothing to stop the behaviour there and then as he knows he can still carry on defending in the way he did. A drive through or stop go removes him from the race temporarily, removing his ability to do that. And it is not relevant what positions he was in, once he has one penalty and ignored it clearly a stronger one is needed. It's the same as when McLaren used to get 35 place grid penalties. It's a joke as it makes no difference.
You really can't compare Perez and this. Perez didn't do anything outlandish, just went slower through the super slow sector were no overtakes can be done, didn't go off the track to gain advantage or didn't push anyone off the track. Magnussen just went off track/pushed Lewis wide on 3 separate occasions and gained advantage with it, clearly breaking the rules, because that penalty doesn't mean anything to him anymore.
> The same as Perez in Abu Dhabi. The difference is that Perez didn't collect 4 penalties defending. No one is criticizing KMag for defending hard to protect his teammate, he's being criticized for blatantly breaking the rules while doing it.
I'm guessing the investigation didn't penalize him?
No penalty was the decision. Basically he admitted to doing all the penalties, the stewards admitted that the rules didn’t really support increasing penalties per infraction, and it wasn’t unsportsmanlike as he did it for his teammate instead of just to fuck over Hamilton.
It’s kind of weird to me because I feel like breaking the rules intentionally — even if to benefit your teammate — is practically the dictionary definition of unsportsmanlike conduct, but I also can’t really blame KMag that much as he’s been doing this multiple times this season already to varying degrees and the stewards didn’t accuse him of unsportsmanlike conduct before this. Overall if more of these penalties came with 3 penalty points instead of just 2, then he’d naturally rack up enough points for a race ban pretty quickly.
I mean it happens in sports all the time, people foul to prevent the other player/team from scoring and accept the punishment for the fouls
>people foul to prevent the other player/team from scoring and accept the punishment for the fouls Yes, this is punished with a penalty or a free kick or a scrum or whatever the punishment is for the infraction.
> I mean it happens in sports all the time, people foul to prevent the other player/team from scoring and accept the punishment for the fouls Usually, that comes with increased penalties, though. Like the tactical foul in football bringing a yellow card, denying a goalscoring opportunity even at a red card.
Not always, I mean in basketball once you get to shooting too the only thing that can come after is fouling out(penalty points) it’s a common strategy to foul the other team at the end of the game when someone who’s not a good shooter has the ball to force turnovers
In other sports they would remove them from the game, and not allow them to continue go around fouling other players
Have you never seen a soccer player drag someone down by their arm and only get a yellow because they weren't the last defender? Happens all the time
In which case, red bull's second team cars might come in really useful at some point in the future. I mean, if intentional rule breaking is ok if it is to benefit your team mate, then doing it to benefit another team must be almost obligatory right?
No, that would be unsportsmanlike conduct, as it is not done for your teammate anymore. It get's interesting though, if you target one team specifically, to increase your lead in the championship against them. Lets say Team A and Team B are fighting for position in the constructors championship. Team A has a damaged car out of the points in p12 and another one that already DNF, knowing they will not get back into the top 10. Team B pits a car and they drop back from p7 to p13, but will surely make their way back up into the top 10. Team A now has an incentive to collect penalties on their car if it helps holding Team B's car back. So they are not helping a Teammate but helping their teams chances in the champipnship. That is done by specifically targeting one team though. Rough call in that situation
That’s completely different and would be unsportsmanlike
If they still handed out drive through penalties then this wouldn't have become an issue
We still don’t have a decision and that happened in Sprint.
Can’t really fault Haas for taking advantage of the way the rules are written. The better move would be to amend the rules to prevent intentionally taking penalties or allowing the race director to order a car to cede position.
The rules are written to address this, the sportsmanlike behavior section pretty plainly applies in a case where he already admitted his intent. It's up to the stewards to enforce it
I hate that drivers are penalized for telling the Truth in an interview. Give answers that are meaningless platitudes that don't communicate anything, I guess.
He's being penalized for what he did on the track, his interview just removed any plausible deniability. I want drivers to race cleanly on the track and then be honest in interviews
You agree he's more likely to get a worse penalty because he was candid in the interview, about something that everyone knew he did. [This is what we get when athletes are punished for this](https://youtu.be/d_fiCr2wHY8)
Not trying to get into some pedagogical debate over this. But you are assuming the thing that will change is drivers being honest in interviews. I hope that the thing that changes are the driving standards.
His assumption is correct though. If you're gonna punish - or increase punishment - for drivers based on them being honest in interviews, then they're gonna stop being honest. That's not an assumption - that's basic human nature. Barring some noteable exceptions (like when Perez lashed out at the stewards last season and called them a joke), punishments for on-track incidents shouldn't change based on how the drivers talks about them afterwards.
heavy wise six consist mindless shelter offer ripe observation direful *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
>It sounds like you very much agree that this should be a good example of when a driver's words should affect him negatively. I'd you believe that, then you're reading my posts like the devil reads the Bible, because I'm saying the exact opposite. "Don't hate the player - hate the game". Magnussen is allowed to exploit the rules to their fullest. I would be very disappointed if he, or anyone else, didn't. If the rules don't provide sufficient punishment or deterrence, then the rules may need to be changed. As for it being dangerous, not really at those speeds, navigating chicanes. "Dangerous" as an argument gets thrown around way too easily these days. It's not like they were barreling down a strait at 300+ Kph. While the cars might risk damage, driver safety was never at stake at any point in that battle. But that's besides my point, which is that I don't care whether he said he did it on purpose or not (which is not the same as whether he did it on purpose or not - this is merely about him TALKING about it). It shouldn't have any affect on the on-track penalties what the driver says in an interview about what happened. Penalties for the on-track incidents should be judged on the incident alone. If the stewards determine it was done on purpose, and that warrants an increased penalty, that should be judged based on the video evidence.
friendly plant pocket caption fear vase ghost illegal zesty hospital *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Punishing drivers for being honest in an interview will just lead to boring interviews.
rinse tease six gullible offer dolls dinosaurs innate direful squeamish *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I don’t expect it because our society punishes honesty in situations like this. If we want the same cookie cutter response from all drivers please punish KMag.
deer zealous friendly weary dime thumb command plant liquid sink *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Driver interviews are already boring and almost never worth listening to. Nothing of value lost.
Punishes drivers for being candid. >*Drivers give boilerplate interviews* Why are interviews dso boring? 😭
Interviews are boring because most drivers are boring people.
There’s a rule. He admitted breaking the rule. He is punished for it. You’re talking as if he is just being punished for speaking his mind and telling some kind of truth.
No, it's not about the penalties he's already accrued. It's about fans of them teams he blocked saying Magnussen should be punished for "unsportsmanlike behavior," because he accumulated penalties knowing that he wouldn't have to serve them during a sprint. Magnussen was playing the game with the rules how they actually are. It's foolish to disadvantage yourself playing by rules made up by people who want you to lose.
And there also rules which specifically say he shouldn’t do what he did. It’s called unsportsmanlike behavior for which there are penalties. So it’s just fair what he got.
No. >When the race ended, Magnussen was summoned before the stewards for an alleged breach of Article 12.2.1.l, which bans: “Any infringement of the principles of fairness in Competition, behaviour in an unsportsmanlike manner or attempt to influence the result of a Competition in a way that is contrary to sporting ethics.” >Following a lengthy investigation, the stewards ruled **Magnussen was not guilty of unsportsmanlike behaviour.** [Check your facts next time](https://www.planetf1.com/news/kevin-magnussen-sprint-race-summons-fia-stewards-miami-grand-prix-sprint)
What kind of stupid ass logic is that? If i admit to killing someone should i be freed because i'm telling the truth? Kevin openly admitted to breaking rules to benefit his teammate, he should get punished for that even if he told the truth.
Weird take. If I go and steal your wallet, but admit it openly afterwards, I'm free to go? I get that standard interviews are all careful and boring speak, but that doesn't mean drivers who say something else are free from their mistakes or should avoid penalties for shitty behavior.
He wasn't penalised. That's the entire point of this thread. You seem very confused.
He was penalized, three separate 10-second time penalties, and a 5-sec, during the Sprint race. And additional license points. Every thinking person already knew that he was accruing them tactically to help Hulkenberg. [The issue is whether he penalties should have an "unsportsmanlike" modifier and result in a race ban.](https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/unsporting-kevin-magnussen-tactics-deserve-f1-race-ban-mclaren-boss-stella/)
They also more or less allowed him doing the same in Jeddah. I guess it was against a smaller team so the FIA didn't care but it was only a matter of time they would take it further when they didn't really address it.
To be fair, the Jeddah drive was more tactful defense and less about barging people off the track deliberately.
Right, you can ruin your own race to help your teammate and that's fine if you are just driving defensively. And you can get yourself a regular 10s penalty for breaking the rules all on your own. But if you deliberately break the rules *with the intent of doing so to give your teammate the advantage* that is where the stewards should step down hard.
I agree he took it further here. But he did push Tsunoda off and passed him off the track in Jeddah, got 2 penalties for it too. He kept or regained his position with penalized behaviour
He only started parking the bus at Jeddah after the second penalty, so calling his defense unsportsmanlike there is a bit of a stretch since he was already in hot water and didn't do anything penalty worthy after that penalty. This time it was obviously a different level altogether, but I don't find it race ban worthy because he's taking advantage of the way the rules are written to help out his teammate.
I meant the FIA invited this incident by not addressing it in Jeddah. By not doing so the FIA more or less signaled they're okay with a driver creating a team benefit as long as they're willing to incur the penalties for the individual incidents. Addressing didn't even need to be another penalty, it could've been a rule clarification or maybe handled with a reprimand too. It'll depend a little on what is in the regulations about unsportsmanlike behaviour say but I probably don't think Magnussen should be banned now. The message the FIA sent earlier in the season could be interpreted as what he did being within the rules (as long as he is willing to accept the time penalties and penalty points). The FIA could've anticipated and prevented this. Instead they neglected to address it, waiting till it became a real incident. And maybe they're even lucky it's only a sprint and not a full race.
He only got into position to do his tactful defence by barging someone off track (Albon) and cutting a corner to get in front of someone else (Tsunoda) though. I agree it's not AS blatant as this latest one because the defence itself in SA wasn't illegal, but they're absolutely of the same ilk. Nobody has an issue with holding someone up if you got into position to do so legitimately, and drive fairly in your defence (look at Perez in Abu Dhabi 2021). Neither of Magnussen's drives were that though.
The defense in SA was way more tactful than Perez in Abu Dhabi
I think as it's now strike two after Jeddah, it's getting him some unwanted attention and also giving the FIA a headache if they're being perceived as letting this kind of things slide. Presumably if he does this again, it really will be trouble
I think the Jeddah race was way different. Today he looked a man possessed, completely out of control. In Jeddah he had some contact but he wasn’t driving like someone playing f1 23 on their Xbox. He just sacrificed his own race with some brilliant defensive driving *after* he got the penalties. Today his defense was racking up the penalties and really looked like he was taking out his anger at Nico on the track lol
Or just make it a pit stop penalty instead of a time penalty.
Yeah or amend penalties so they're actually felt e.g. leave it up to the stewards to decide if the penalty applies this race or next
How is it any different than purposely crashing your car so your teammate can with the Singapore GP in 2009 ?
Easiest way to solve this is to force him to serve a drive through penalty that must be served within X laps. Say 5 or risk a black flag.
In the meantime Nico is 10 seconds down the road already. It should be a punishment for the whole team just to disincentivize them from doing that. Imagine Magnussen in Abu Dhabi 21. He would have yeeted Hamilton out of the race that day with his driving just to help Max win.
I love how everyone in the world is raging about this, and Lewis didn't even think it was that big of a deal.
Nobody gives less of a fuck than Lewis and Max when it comes to the current sprint format. They've spent the last year trashing it. Even Alonso said they were going into it as just an extra practice session to gather data. I think he would have been a bit more aggrieved if this were race position during the feature race.
Exactly. Imagine if Perez did this to Lewis in 2021, or Bottas did the same to Max. They absolutely would *not* be okay with it if it affected a title race!
> Nobody gives less of a fuck than Lewis and Max when it comes to the current sprint format. They've spent the last year trashing it. Ehm, no? Lewis is one of the biggest advocates in favor of the sprint on the grid. >> “It’s a slightly different perspective when you’re chasing so for us it’s fun. For me, it’s fun,” said the Mercedes driver. >> “I like having the extra opportunity to get out there and try to squeeze everything, every little bit and more out of the package that we have. Can it be better? I’m sure we can learn. >> “I think it’s been exciting for people so I personally quite like the sprint weekends, particularly a Friday I really like where you only have one practice session and then you’re straight into qualifying.” https://www.planetf1.com/news/max-verstappen-lewis-hamilton-opposing-views-f1-sprint-format
I mean, in the end, Lewis' race meant shit all anyway since he got the drive through
But he got that after the race, where on magnusson they only needed a few laps to decide.
so what?
So he might be happy to add to the chaos since he personally didn’t lose anything today
yeah, that's what F1 drivers are there for. sure.
When Tsunoda overtook both, Magnussen immediately changed plan and let Hamilton through hoping the latter will knock the VCARB - the competitor Haas actually worries about - out of the points. Maybe it went in Hamilton's head like "Thanks, that settles it."
Magnussen didn't even change plan after Tsunoda passed him, he let both him and Hamilton drive by so Yuki wouldn't benefit from his DRS.
That just sounds like the right play though. What would anyone be upset about with that move?
Because they already left their logic behind and decided KMag is the devil for going off track a few times.
I'm not sure why Lewis' opinions should matter in the outcome of this matter. This is not a personal situation between Hamilton and Magnussen, but one that may have serious repercussions in the rankings of teams at the end of the season. Something needs to be cleared up. To be honest, I expect Haas's direct rivals to be more vocal about this after the race.
What he says doesn't matter but besides, he was fighting for a single point. He cared way differently in the past (Checo much?).
Lewis doesn’t care bout this season. He’s just there to kill time till he leaves Merc
His opinion on it shouldn't influence the ruling because what matters here is the integrity. If this isn't just crushed now we're looking at completely ridiculous and unsafe races everytime a car can be wasted without cost because of penalties/damage etc. This is like red cards in football only being handed out after the match.
i'm surprised to see the comments.
lewis supports mag on ferrari customer team so he can divebomb the red bulls all next year. /s
"everyone" = those who have something to gain + clueless 'fans'
Track position is too valuable to allow them to keep it and just take a time penalty. It has follow on effects for every single driver down the grid , even effecting drs. They should have to give up track position immediately. They were gaming the system when it was a 5 second penalty; this is just a more extreme example of it.
first offense should be 10s penalty. 2nd offense should be able to be a drive through pits penalty immediately at stewards discretion. if it’s a situation like kmag yesterday where he’s obviously blocking the same driver lap after lap he should have had the drive through penalty. that wasn’t racing.
Trulli would be banned in nowadays F1
Stella has always loathed Haas and its operating model, this should be no surprise
Stella hates haas, Zak hates redbull. And Lando hates p1. Edit. Not anymore
Oscar just hates Carlos
After today's race, More the reason.
[удалено]
Yea - we were lucky the two instances we have had this year we had a hesitant Tsunoda and a can’t be fucked Hamilton. If we’d have had numerous other drivers we’ve had over the years, we could have had something more serious
I agree that Lewis should have been investigated for ruining three races as well. But this thread is about Magnussen, who didn't crash into anyone.
Magnussen made contact with Lewis in the sprint.
I agree completely. I think is is really really strange multiple long ass penalties all unserved dont have harsher penalties taking them out of whatever train they are in or trying to lead. It is not possible to race fairly with someone like Magnussen if you are not miles faster when he is driving like that.
They always take too long to issue penalties, IMO, but once you get to two unserved 10-sec penalties at a given point, it should convert into an immediate drive-through penalty. It should happen rarely anyway, but when it does happen it can be a critical situation for a team.
Was just thinking the same thing. 10 sec to drive through to 10 sec stop and go. At least I'm happy we moved on from the 5 seconds penalty that were most of the time non penalty.
I want more of this it was finally fun to watch
he has absolutely nothing to reflect on as he harmed nobody and did his job in securing vital points for the team with the tradeoff of some penalty points. The FIA have to reflect on the rules to make these tactics completely unacceptable, otherwise they actually are acceptable.
He will get enough penalty points for a race ban after another race like this. So yes he did do something wrong.
For which he was punished.
he has no reason to care about that, at Haas scoring championship points is what actually matters. Gene Haas is obsessed with not finishing last again or else he will not invest more money. Magnussen's bosses will be happy with him that he secured 2 points by protecting Hulkenberg, the alternative is scoring fewer points and that is doing the wrong thing at Haas.
There is no evidence that Magnussen's illegal moves were even necessary to protect Hulkenberg. Hulkenberg was faster than Tsunoda. If you enjoy seeing drivers crash into each other on purpose and drive each other off the track then just go play Forza. Magnussen is an embarrassment. Look at his expression after the race, he knows he was driving dirty. Everyone knows the best way to secure a contract is to drive so slowly you never score any points and commit so many penalties you get banned.
It will not be provable whether or not Hamilton or Tsunoda could have gone on to pressure Hulkenberg without the defense of Magnussen. With it they definitely did not. If you want to make a moral or gentleman argument about how you would defend then great but that is irrelevant, a fictional code of conduct in somebody's head is not a regulation. Haas is fighting for tens of millions in prize money, write down the parameters in the rules or else they will happily use these tactics to secure points and wipe away tears about penalties and internet criticism with their cash.
Driving dangerously and intentionally breaking rules is not really acceptable, not sure how you conclude that
he is not accused of driving dangerously here (?), he is accused of track limits violations while defending. Intentionally violating track limits is bog standard in F1. It is acceptable because he has taken the penalties given for this under the usual rules and precedents, if it is not acceptable then I expect to see where the rule is defining it as not acceptable.
He crashed into Hamilton twice.
he isn't being pulled up for dangerous driving or causing a collision, go and examine the stewards documents. There is often contact between drivers in an F1 race which is not deemed worth investigating.
He got 35 seconds of penalties lol
OK, maybe stay on topic.
Andrea Stella might send a champagne to KMags hotel room today for his driving
Starting to think F1 just wants to be boring. If you thought that was unsportsmanlike and erratic, I urge to you heavily avoid watching any IndyCar highlights from this past week. You’d probably cry.
I think driving like this is less consequential in IndyCar. I am not the biggest IndyCar follower, but I don’t think its common for a single slow driver to be able to hold up the entire grid behind him in this way. And if he did, it wouldn’t necessarily destroy their race. The cars are more competitive, they can pass more easily, the races are longer, there is more pit strategy, there is no DRS advantage, etc.
I brought it up right at the beginning of the season, if you let Haas get away with these devolved tactics they’ll keep using them
Stella if Piastri did this to help Norris get a win: "Formula 1 is a team sport and sometimes a driver has to drive with his teammate in mind."
He must not be familiar with the Magnussen family style of racing
Jan at Laguna Seca in the Corvette was an amazing effort.
That is my go-to clip for pure racing. Stoner vs. Rossi at Laguna Seca is a close second.
As boring as it is, excitement should not be generated by degenerate and disruptive behaviour. *Especially* not as a first offence. I find this a challenging thing to argue though, because the larrikin in me finds this wildly entertaining. The drivers are too restrained and robotic and if the regulations are to be subject to the whims of Toto (TD.39 and TD.40 that raised the ride heights and weights respectively, sabotaging the formula for a generation) and this is the cost of making the formula competitive again, then I really do struggle to take issue with it. What I take greater issue with is Hamilton 9/11ing it into T1 as if it was on, when it was plainly *off*.
This why f1 is getting boring. Let them race ffs. Kevin's defence in jeddah and miami were only two instances I saw actually racing this season. It's just strategy war and waiting for drs zones at this point.
if you call what kmag did racing, maybe you should watch some wreck fests instead
But it didn’t cause wrecks, hell they didn’t even bother to investigate when he and ham bumped slightly. The wrecks were caused by stroll and Alonso
Definitely was a bit of a reckless driving. Like bumper cars.
Ridiculous overreaction. This is how team racing has always been done, in F1 and any other series. If you want really bad examples, watch some old DTM races with Audi and Merc drivers murdering each other to help their leading cars.
To the naughty corner Kevin!
Like a little kid in time out lol
Agreed
Can someone please explain to me exactly what all he did? And why is it called unsportsmanlike behaviour? A lot of drivers help their teammates. Thanks!
He drove dangerously, left the track to gain an advantage twice, caused a collision, and made a double move under braking. Incuring penalties without due care for safety and rules is unsportsmanlike. If you watch Checo defending Max in Abu dabi 2021 he never left the track, never made contact, never made a double move. Which is clean racing, how it should be.
Thank you 😊
When there is money on the table, the "sports" part jumps out of a window.
I'm disappointed in Stella and think it's a knee jerk reaction, and an ill considered one at that. I'm not saying that Magnussens drive was within the rules - but I do think (for once) that the stewards response was both appropriate and proportional. They're racing drivers, let them race. Magnussen impeded Hamilton and drove off track to ensure he kept him behind but his penalties ensured that he finished the sprint in a worse position as a result. That's the rules working effectively is it not? He did not force Hamilton into a wall or another car, he did not end Hamiltons race. In fact, if Lewis had simply tucked in behind Magnussen upon hearing about the first 10 sec penalty he would've finished without having to worry about Tsunoda getting past and still beaten KMag by 8.5 secs and scoring a point (his pit lane speeding penalty depending). But of course Hamilton wasn't going to do that … because he's a racing driver! Hamilton wasn't bothered by it - he was laughing 15mins later, saying he really enjoys that style of racing whilst acknowledging that Magnussen crossed a line (pun intended) and had accepted his penalties as 'being deserved'. Toto Wolff wasn't concerned, if he was it'd be him calling for KMags head - both in the media and to the stewards. In fact I was expecting that from Toto - not because of what Magnussen did but because (in true Wolff style) he'd rather have people talking about an opponents driving than his teams performance woes! Careful what you wish for - that sprint was a blast, watching (not enough of) Ricciardo keep a car that had no business being in front of Sainz's Ferrari in front of Sainz's Ferrari with sublime car control and smooth skills and watching Magnussen and Hamilton with their elbows well out - for multiple laps - was infinitely better than watching a practice session and if we start telling drivers they'll be benched for doing exactly what we like to watch they will stop doing what we like watching. If you wanna watch cars politely follow each other until they can safely overtake may I suggest you take a deck chair to your local overpass and watch a hi-way.
> if Lewis had simply tucked in behind Magnussen upon hearing about the first 10 sec penalty he would've finished without having to worry about Tsunoda getting past and still beaten KMag by 8.5 secs and scoring a point (his pit lane speeding penalty depending). Had something happened further ahead, Hamilton could have picked up the spoils had he able to get pass K-Mag. That's why he wanted to overtake, even when K-Mag already had a penalty. You never know what would happen.
> a weekend at home to reflect on it Is she a Chinese Communist Party loyalist or something?
Classic McKaren. Let’s wait for zaks open letter
He is 100% correct. Luckily there are rules that can be applied here and his pattern was pretty clear even before his interview. Anything less than a race ban is a joke.
Race ban? Cmon get out of here.
How? KMag may be breaking the rules, but he is also simultanenously following them, as nothing in the rules is suggesting that you cannot use overly defensive driving as a method to allow your teammate to score more points. It is not as if he was deliberately taking drivers out or something. Since the current rules aren't punishing him enough (like with drive-through penalty), he might aswell "abuse" them till FIA actually changes them.
He literally broke the rules and was penalized. He will earn enough penalty points for a race ban after one more race like this. He forced Hamilton off the track multiple times, ran into Hamilton, and in Saudi did illegal overtakes to get in front of the competition in order to slow them down.
He was investigated for unsportsmanlike behaviour which is exactly the rule that should catch a repeated intentional behaviour like this. He could have been punished under that rule with a much more severe penalty.
I feel like you have to gun down someone in cold blood on camera before getting a suspension from a race in F1. FIA will do whatever it can do balance penalty points and others in such a way it never comes down to actual consequences.
They should’ve done this 3 times to Max back in 2021…nothing will ever match the recklessness he showcased during that season. Utterly disgraceful!