Max Verstappen’s attempt to defend the lead of the Saudi Arabian Grand Prix into Turn 1 fooled nobody.
It is what we have typically come to expect from the Dutchman when trying to defend his position from another driver: take the outside line and claim he was forced off the track.
Verstappen has been guilty of pulling the same move in a role reversal, having also forced off Lando Norris during last year’s Mexican Grand Prix and left the track and gained an advantage in the process.
F1 fans felt Verstappen should learn a lesson from the incident in Saudi Arabia, while Alex Brundle felt the penalty was ‘absolutely fair’ given he did not immediately hand the position back to Piastri.
After the race, Christian Horner did his usual press conference with the media in which he professed Verstappen’s innocence, but it was the typical response out of the PR playbook rather than a genuine attempt to explain the regulations.
Christian Horner should stop wasting time explaining obvious penalties for Max Verstappen
Horner came prepared to his media session in Saudi Arabia armed with a printout showing Verstappen’s onboard and his car ahead of Piastri’s, claiming he was ahead at the apex.
The stewards took a slightly different view, in that they felt Piastri had earned the right to the corner because his front wheel was in line with the mirror of Verstappen’s Red Bull at the apex.
Horner argued the case for Verstappen, but shied away from taking it any further, according to journalist Matt Coch when speaking on the Pit Talk podcast.
“Christian Horner walks out, does his press conference, he shows these pictures; the smoking gun and says ‘Here is the black and white evidence’ and then the question comes ‘So are you going to appeal?’ and he says ‘Hmm, no I don’t think so’,” said Coch.
“So there is all this evidence that is new, but it’s not worth appealing, which tells you all you need to know about how genuine this attempt was at a real defence as opposed to appearing to be on the side of your driver, when it’s clearly a nonsense argument.”
How Max Verstappen games the rules to suit himself
It is not the first time Horner has brought props to his media sessions in an attempt to show Verstappen was in the right.
After the spat between Verstappen and Norris at last years Mexican GP which earned the Dutchman two time penalties, Horner brought a sheet allegedly showing Norris’ telemetry data and argued that the stewards got the penalty wrong.
Horner claimed that Norris was simply going too fast to make the move around the outside of Turn 10 on Verstappen, but missed out the fact that the Dutchman was also going too fast to make the apex.
In both the Mexico and Saudi Arabia cases, Horner makes reference to the position of a car relative to the apex of a corner to determine if they have the right to be ahead.
This is often where Verstappen has been able to ‘game’ the rule, as the Driving Standards Guidelines highlight the distinction of being in front at the apex of a corner and the advantage this gives to the overtaking car: “In considering what is a ‘significant part’, for an overtake on the outside of a corner, among the various factors to be considered by the stewards in exercising their discretion, the stewards will take into account whether the overtaking car is ahead of the other car from the apex of the corner.”
Verstappen sought to use this strategy to stay ahead of Norris at the apex of Turn 12, despite having no intention of staying within track limits. On that occasion, it worked, as Norris was given the penalty.
But in Saudi Arabia, it was clear that Verstappen was trying to enact the same get out of jail free card on Piastri, but the Australian was savvy enough to ensure he was the lead car before the Red Bull driver tried the overtake.
It is likely to be a point of contention for the rest of the season, but it goes to show that Horner is usually making a point of supporting his driver rather than genuinely about how the rules are applied in such contentious circumstances.
Leave feedback about this