JEM
+13047Latest comments
Rumors
Popular on GPBlog
1
Verstappen and Kelly Piquet in Italy - For a meeting with Wolff?
2151 times read
2
Verstappen in England at Red Bull: This is the reason why
1962 times read
3
Bernie Ecclestone slams 'idiot' Horner's handling of sex scandal
1587 times read
4
Horner vs. Red Bull: Brit wants $50 million after dismissal
1142 times read
+4
JEM
Reading tge words from Vasseur, it kinda sounds that Alonso was able to better utilize the slicks compared to Lewis wasn't. Does that say something about Lewis or Alonso? Or should Vasseur have phrased it differently?14:25
+0
JEM
Yep, this perfectly shows the type of person that you are. At no point has any of us defended Horner in this thread, but only confront you about what you have posted. And instead of admitting that, you start lying and deflecting. Very sad, but no surprise.06:51
+4
JEM
This is not about defending Horner, but showing respect to a recent deceased person.10-07-2025 13:54
+12
JEM
Jeez mate, show respect. No need to trash talk Horner at the expense of a deceased person.10-07-2025 10:13
+4
JEM
Vegan, when Christian joined Red Bull F1 team, were they a succesful team already? Or did he help to build it to a team that won 6WCC and 8WDC?10-07-2025 07:52
+2
JEM
How many races has Max thrown away in your opinion, before he was signed by Red Bull in 2016?08-07-2025 10:48
+0
JEM
@Mike tt, you're last comment makes no sense at all. Piastri endangered other drivers, it ain't about his passport. George didn't, the worse thing he did, was to screw Max into a penalty, which failed.08-07-2025 06:40
+1
JEM
This relates to Article 55.15 of F1’s Sporting Regulations that states: “From the point at which the lights on the car are turned out, drivers must proceed at a pace which involves no erratic acceleration or braking nor any manoeuvre which is likely to endanger other drivers or impede the restarts.” The incident with George was when the lights were still on (he is allowed to accelerate, brake and weave), while with Piastri the lights were out (he is not allowed to drastically accelerate, brake or weave as this is erratic and can be consider dangerous). As for Max, would Max just have overtaken George or Piastri, then the stewards had enough reason to give him a penalty for overtaking, but he didn't. He was forced due to their actions. And whereas for the one with George, you could say Max put himself in a funderable position by almost driving next to George), this wasn't the case with Piastri. But in both cases in wasn't a voluntare action by Max.07-07-2025 23:07
+1
JEM
Hi StillRoy, agree with you on Russell. And I think also that the choices from Mercedes weren't spot on. Hard tires, didn't make sense. Back to the intermediates was 1 lap too late and the last one too early. It seemed more like a gamble then a solid strategy. By the way, my comment was more related to the silly comment that Max would deliberately underperform to get the clause in the contract activated. I shouldn't have, but I couldn't help myself.07-07-2025 17:13
+1
JEM
Come on Mike tt, there are two difference between Canada and Silverstone: 1. In Canada they were still behind the safety car. And although it was a sneaky move from George, he acted within the rules that allow him the break and accelerate. Yes, the GAP with the safety car extended beyond the 10 cars length but that was it. In Silverstone the safety car had just ended. And then you aren't allowed to drastically change speed anymore. 2. Visibility, in Silverstone the visibility was really poor and in then end what Piastri did, could be considered dangerous. Which also became visible in how the cars behind Piastri bunched up. As for Max overtaking the other drivers, in both cases it was clearly visible that Max tried to avoid overtaking and therefore a penalty for Max wouldn't make sense.07-07-2025 17:04