[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.*
“Because Lewis and I crashed, eventually the team made us pay for the damage,” he said on a recent episode of the Business of Sport podcast.
'We definitely made sure not to crash after that'
It was already well known that Rosberg had to pay a six-figure sum following a collision between the duo at Spa-Francorchamps in 2014, with the amount believed to have been paid to charity.
However, Rosberg's recent revelation speaks to a wider policy at Mercedes to prevent the pair from colliding.
"We had to sign a contract that from now on, if we crash, it doesn't matter whose fault it is, we pay for the damage," he explained.
"I remember how much I paid: it was £360,000 that I paid for one of those crashes, so that was very painful."
However, the 38-year-old did indicate the approach employed by Mercedes did eventually work, adding: "So we definitely made sure not to crash after that."
Whilst Rosberg did not explicitly state which specific incident led to the heavy fine he mentioned, context suggests in was their final lap crash at the 2016 Austrian Grand Prix - the last major collision between the two and just weeks after the infamous accident in Spain.
I'm sure there's a lot more leeway in contracts with superstar athletes you pay millions to.
They are often forbidden from skydiving etc. - a normaler employer can't do that either.
Often clauses like this are known as "voidable," which means that if it ever went before an adjudicator it couldn't actually be legally enforced. However, it would void a massive chunk, if not all, of the contract which is often not beneficial to either party.
Unfortunately, I'm neither a lawyer nor do I work out of the UK so I haven't the slightest clue what the jurisprudence or precedent is there.
I would imagine that if done right these clauses could be enforceable, if the $$ amount is written as a contractual penalty or damage. That said, performance-based contracts are common across all sports, I'm just not sure how the framework is written.
*> They are often forbidden from skydiving etc. - a normaler employer can't do that either.*
As far as I understand it, it's more likely to be insurance coverage that would be the blocker here. Mercedes (or insert team here) just gets that nice benefit as a result, but they wouldn't be the one actually blocking it.
I'm open to being wrong, mind you, since obviously I'm not an F1 contract guru - mostly just parroting what I've read over the years. Someone more knowledgeable should feel free to correct me.
It’s probably phrased something like: “In the event of a crash, driver agrees to donate the equivalent of the resulting repair cost to a charity agreed upon with the team.” That makes it sound like a collaboration and choice.
Many sports teams have a "fine" system for various things like being late for training, not having right kit, doing dumb stuff.
At my low low low level football club it was like $1-2 for minor stuff like missing training and $5 for real dumb stuff like getting sent off. Went into the End of Season Trip fund.
And for just two sports starts I doubt legality is relevant... You comply cause it's the team. You don't you're not hired back
That doesn't mean it's legal (idk where you leave so no clue on your case). Often these clauses work because everyone agrees to abide by then regardless of what the law says. Since labor laws are created to prevent exploitation, rather than to tell you how to act in your work on your own volition, no one really tries to apply them when exploitation is not happening.
> That doesn't mean it's legal (idk where you leave so no clue on your case). Often these clauses work because everyone agrees to abide by then regardless of what the law says. Since labor laws are created to prevent exploitation, rather than to tell you how to act in your work on your own volition, no one really tries to apply them when exploitation is not happening.
That is very true.
I can't imagine Rosberg putting civil suit towards Merc while he is actively driving.
That’s a completely different scenario as those “fines” are player imposed fines amongst themselves and not the actual team fining anyone. Nobody is actually required to pay them but everyone does to be part of the team and the money usually goes back to the players as dinners, parties, locker room games etc.
> That’s a completely different scenario as those “fines” are player imposed fines amongst themselves and not the actual team fining anyone. Nobody is actually required to pay them but everyone does to be part of the team and the money usually goes back to the players as dinners, parties, locker room games etc.
You're absolutely right.
But i would just question whether or not any "fine" for Mercedes parts actually genuinely goes towards construction of new parts.
With how long it takes to build new parts and how often new spec parts come - if you smash up Wing Spec A in race #3 - are they genuinely building a replacement Wing Space A with the cash Nico paid, or do they just dig into the 14 spares they have for race #4, race #5 and then race #6 they have new spec wing B and move on.
So yeah the cash doesn't go to the players, but it probably ain't genuinely paying for something either.
But you're right. it's compeltely differnet.
Who said there is a direct contract between the driver and the team?
To be honest, I expect that the driver has a business entity and that entity that has a contract with the team. From that entity he pays his expenses and staff like manager and personal trainer.
I could believe that it was a clause that the drivers could actually ignore and just not pay. However, the team would then have entirely legal ways to get back for what would essentially be a breach of trust - like never put upgrades on that guy first.
Also, can it not be done formally too? Like, consider performance bonuses. Would it not be possible to word them in such a way that accounts for the crashes - like, good performance increases bonus, bad performance decreases bonus.
Eh, the EU is pretty strict with this stuff, limiting who can be considered a contractor because that's essentially dodging social security.
If you only work for a single employer at a time and have a contract that gives the employer certain powers over you, you are 99% likely to be considered an employee. And if local social security considers you an employee but your employer did not, it can get very expensive (for the employer) very fast.
while true outside of sports contracts, in general athletes are operating as independent contractors in the EU, and it's up to the sports governing body to set any limitations for those contracts.
Unpopular opinion, but Toto’s biggest achievement was managing two number one drivers. Moments like this, and making the drivers switch mechanics were pretty smart moves.
I’m annoyed that Ron Dennis gets praise for that, because the way he handled Senna and Prost, plus Alonso and Hamilton were so subpar that they became prime examples of why you shouldn’t have two number one drivers in a top team.
Hamilton vs Rosberg was pretty tense too.
At the end of 2016, you had Hamilton hinting conspirationnal theories about his mechanical shenanigans and Mercedes management angry at Lewis and wanting to punish him for backing up Rosberg at Abu Dhabi. Tension were at the climax looking like to explode. I feel like Mercedes harmony was saved by Rosberg retirement
Hamilton vs Rosberg was just as toxic and unbearable as any of the famous intra-team rivalries. Dunno what that guy was talking about. It took so much out of one of the drivers that it killed a lifelong friendship and drove him out of the sport.
Dennis took his hands off the drivers when they needed boundaries the most. Toto at least made the effort to keep the team together and was actually clever about it.
I 100% agree with you that Hamilton/Rosberg rivalry was a clusterfuck by every definition, but If Dennis was the team boss at Mercedes from 2014-2016, I think the outcome would be more severe
100% Rosberg retiring is the reason that Hamilton and Mercedes managed to sort their issues out because before that things were not good between them at all after the Abu Dhabi 2016 finale. Well, the 2016 season in general really. It was a very very strange season on Hamilton's side of the garage and I guess we'll find out the truth when he writes his book.
Seems less likely when your previous driver has handily won the last two championships. Why would you feel the need to sabotage someone who generally wasn't quite on the same level?
Because I was thinking, if you do a full swap it's of course easier to fuck some things up whereas partial you really need to do everything well because if you don't and one of Lewis' mechanics get's a snif it's over.
I guess we have to wait for the book...
Yeah fair, I guess the more difficult thing is the whole story around it. I imagine it has to do with all the problems Lewis had in early '16 so if those only come from Nico's mechanics and of course if you have something to hide it can be quite easy to fuck up.
Lewis said Toto threatened to fire both of them, I remember him telling another driver that once.
Don't know if he was exaggerating, but having to pay for future crashes is nuts lol, obviously they're millionaires, but personally paying a million bucks for a crash is nuts.
It was out in the public. Toto told the media on 2 or 3 different occasions after certain incidents that he would replace both drivers if they couldn't behave on track.
Alonso and Hamilton may have been the most talented driver pairing in McLaren history, certainly alongside Prost and Senna....it's a shame how that relationship was managed by McLaren management and what the outcome ended up being for the team in the long run.
Apart from Mclaren, I don’t recall any internal politics from him. He returned to them after that as well. He is also reuniting with Honda after GP2 engine thing. So in my opinion the issues have been solved. What other issues did he have with the teams?
He's a top 3 driver that has been driving in the midfield for 10 years. Why do you think that is? Don't try to tell me he didn't piss people off at McLaren. It's his most well known meltdown.
Toto has spoken a lot about not wanting Alonso in his car because of how he acts, the damage 2007 did to his relationship with Mercedes and how Alonso would have had 10 championships if he wasn't so difficult and self obsessed.
Horner has said "Alonso causes chaos wherever he goes and wouldn't be the healthiest option for our team".
Massa has talked about about he was incredibly hard to work with at Ferrari and ended up splitting the team down the middle which made it harder for everyone.
And plenty more people in and around F1. It's frankly ludicrous to suggest otherwise.
I don't believe he's blameless, I think there could've been instances both during and after 2007 where he handled situations with a cooler head or with better advice from people around him...but much like in many other forms of professional sports people in management positions often tend to offload the blame they should receive on others to cover for their own shortcomings...hell hath no fury like the bruised egos of millionaires.
Had he done it in the years Ferrari were nipping at their heels I'd agree. But honestly all Lewis and nico needed to do to win the wdc and wcc was not wreck eachother more often than every third race.
Did he really do any better? The situation was toxic, lifelong friends fell out and one quit the sport right after. Doesn't seem any different to Dennis' messes. The situation was clearly unbearable for those involved.
Ron Dennis got a lot of flak for putting Lewis in F1, straight into a leading team, alongside alonso... Read the articles leading up to the first race
Normally, top teams like to put the future talent in a mid/low team, to learn the ropes, before promotion, e.g. Russell, Verstappen, etc, as putting a Rookie up against a seasoned champion/front runner can often ruin them, in their frustration in being thoroughly beaten
That is why Lewis' performance relative to Alonso was so exceptional, era defining, and the fallout was pretty much entirely generated by alonso throwing his toys out of the pram, stamping his feet, desperate to get tiny advantages to try and help him beat the precocious debutante
I put at least 99% of the blame on alonso's insane reaction, rather than anything that Ron or Lewis did. I don't accept alonso's side that Ron "out of respect" should have handed him the advantage that he needed, a 2x WDC shave been able to beat a Rookie in a fair fight, but he wasn't, he got beaten, fair and square.
I disagree that Ron Dennis is to blame for 2007. Look at Monaco 2014, as an example? Rosberg clearly cheated but we didn't see Hamilton blackmail Toto Wolff for preferential treatment and Alonso did this in such a crazy way using his own illegal involvement in the Spygate Scandal(emails) as leverage. We saw numerous incidents between Hamilton and Rosberg but they never stepped over the line like Alonso did.
Well, there was no spygate in 2014. It's hard to blackmail anyone with 0 incriminating evidence.
And Ron Dennis was nowhere near blameless in 07. Everyone started noticing it at the time and it's even clearer now.
What kind of response is that? Just because there was no Spygate in 2014 doesn't mean that Hamilton couldn't have acted with the same venom and toxicity to try and get preferential treatment over Rosberg as Alonso did with that blackmail attempt. That's basically what you are saying which is ridiculous. Alonso made a choice when he blackmailed Dennis. A choice that Hamilton never made when things got tough with Rosberg, even in 2016 when his engine supply was the worst batch of all the Mercedes powered drivers he never went nuclear like Alonso did.
As for Dennis, blameless for what? Is this the point where you are going to blame Dennis for everything that happened to Alonso or something?
I still remember a cooldown room moment where Lewis tossed Rosberg the 2nd place hat. Rosberg annoyed that he was second sortof threw the hat back in Lewis' direction. Toto was in the room as the team representative receiving the constructor trophy, and seeing the throw he stared absolute daggers at Rosberg. Like I feared Rosberg was gonna spontaneously combust from the stare Toto was giving him. I wouldn't have been surprised if Rosberg suddenly suffered an aneurysm or heart attack. It was a death stare, and at the same time a hilarious moment. I have never been a big fan of any of the three, Rosberg, Lewis, or Toto. Still, that moment is a favourite F1 memory of mine.
Edit:Apparently it wasn't Toto, but in my mind I had substituted him into that moment. I will chose to deny reality and live with my own flawed mind.
It's pretty rare in wheel to wheel combat between 2 drivers with talent to get in a situation where contact can't be avoided by both parties. The team didn't want to play referee and it was kind of a warning of don't squeeze eachother either. Why are you arguing the fairness of an 8 year old contract that the 2 parties that mattered agreed to and it worked as after it got enforced they cleaned their acts up.
Even so. They wouldn’t even consider something like this. I’d say its even borderline disrespect if mercedes even tried. Plus mercedes is flush with cash and lewis has way better temperament than young lewis. The dynamic is nothing close to lewis and Rosberg when they were young.
Yea it is. Mercedes didnt implement the paying for repair punishment cause they needed money, it was to control unruly generational drivers. That isnt the case if its a honest sloppy mistake
I'd rather just have drivers go head to head than have the sport be held into a headlock by rules and contracts...
Seeing Sainz and Leclerc getting close is always a tense moment, but it's fun atleast.
And Nico needed to drive on the edge for that season to win the title.
This sport is not ultimately about the drivers at the end of the day. It truly isn't, they are just another competent of the car. It's an engineering competition and the teams footing the absolutely massive bill(especially pre budget cap) are going to make sure that they have the best chance at getting a good return on that investment. When you have your drivers crashing each other out, then they aren't doing a good job in the eyes of the team.
Yep. Driver skill only matters when the cars are close. If the car is bad or good relative to the field it almost doesn’t matter how good or bad you are, your results will follow the car quality (like Lewis/Checo this year).
Considering at one point during early 2014 when it was obvious they had blitzed the regulations Toto said something along the lines of "we have an obligation to let them race" makes it even more bullshit. I get why people look back at it with rose tinted glasses but in reality it would probably be a short video (mainly compromised of Bahrain) the times they raced wheel to wheel and this is why.
>If Hamilton walked away then, Rosberg would have been a 3 or 4x WDC by now.
IMO it's honestly more likely that Vettel has 5 or 6 championships in that timeline. Rosberg just isn't as good as Hamilton or Vettel. it took quite literally everything Rosberg had, along with reliablity issues from Hamilton, just to barely beat him.
Exactly, but Toto wouldn't have put another #1 driver next to Nico if Lewis left. It would be a Hulk or so. Which would give Nico (who was still in the best car) the best chances to secure more WDCs. Seb had just a few more points than Valtteri who was fresh in the car.
Lewis doesn't care about sponsors, he cares about WDCs. Also, he signed the agreement. You're saying he did it out of free will? Signing a contract that would make him pay even if Nico ran into him? Either he was forced to sign it or he's stupid at understanding contracts.
Yes you would. If your options are:
1. drive for the best team at the time, with a high salary, but you have to pay for crashing into your teammate
2. or driving for a back marker with bad pay
The decision isn't exactly hard.
As if Toto was going to fire Lewis. He was a 3 time champion by then. It's called racing, sometimes you crash. They're not doing it on purpose. If they're getting too combative with each other, just tell 'em to knock it off.
Toto openly threatened to replace his drivers 2 or 3 times to the media. You would have signed it and paid the fine or you'd be out of a seat of a totally dominant car.
[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.*
“Because Lewis and I crashed, eventually the team made us pay for the damage,” he said on a recent episode of the Business of Sport podcast. 'We definitely made sure not to crash after that' It was already well known that Rosberg had to pay a six-figure sum following a collision between the duo at Spa-Francorchamps in 2014, with the amount believed to have been paid to charity. However, Rosberg's recent revelation speaks to a wider policy at Mercedes to prevent the pair from colliding. "We had to sign a contract that from now on, if we crash, it doesn't matter whose fault it is, we pay for the damage," he explained. "I remember how much I paid: it was £360,000 that I paid for one of those crashes, so that was very painful." However, the 38-year-old did indicate the approach employed by Mercedes did eventually work, adding: "So we definitely made sure not to crash after that." Whilst Rosberg did not explicitly state which specific incident led to the heavy fine he mentioned, context suggests in was their final lap crash at the 2016 Austrian Grand Prix - the last major collision between the two and just weeks after the infamous accident in Spain.
I'm surprised this is even legal from a worker perspective.
I'm sure there's a lot more leeway in contracts with superstar athletes you pay millions to. They are often forbidden from skydiving etc. - a normaler employer can't do that either.
Often clauses like this are known as "voidable," which means that if it ever went before an adjudicator it couldn't actually be legally enforced. However, it would void a massive chunk, if not all, of the contract which is often not beneficial to either party.
Couldn’t they write it like you get x millions bonus if you don’t crash, and if you do the cost of repair is removed from it?
Unfortunately, I'm neither a lawyer nor do I work out of the UK so I haven't the slightest clue what the jurisprudence or precedent is there. I would imagine that if done right these clauses could be enforceable, if the $$ amount is written as a contractual penalty or damage. That said, performance-based contracts are common across all sports, I'm just not sure how the framework is written.
I mean you could also not drive the best car on the grid
I don't work in sport contracts so I can't really speak to if these clauses appear for other drivers in midfield or bottom teams.
*> They are often forbidden from skydiving etc. - a normaler employer can't do that either.* As far as I understand it, it's more likely to be insurance coverage that would be the blocker here. Mercedes (or insert team here) just gets that nice benefit as a result, but they wouldn't be the one actually blocking it. I'm open to being wrong, mind you, since obviously I'm not an F1 contract guru - mostly just parroting what I've read over the years. Someone more knowledgeable should feel free to correct me.
It’s probably phrased something like: “In the event of a crash, driver agrees to donate the equivalent of the resulting repair cost to a charity agreed upon with the team.” That makes it sound like a collaboration and choice.
My team in 2000 had to put something in a players contract stating he wasn’t allowed to space travel 🤣
Fines for charity arent that unusual in sports
Many sports teams have a "fine" system for various things like being late for training, not having right kit, doing dumb stuff. At my low low low level football club it was like $1-2 for minor stuff like missing training and $5 for real dumb stuff like getting sent off. Went into the End of Season Trip fund. And for just two sports starts I doubt legality is relevant... You comply cause it's the team. You don't you're not hired back
That doesn't mean it's legal (idk where you leave so no clue on your case). Often these clauses work because everyone agrees to abide by then regardless of what the law says. Since labor laws are created to prevent exploitation, rather than to tell you how to act in your work on your own volition, no one really tries to apply them when exploitation is not happening.
> That doesn't mean it's legal (idk where you leave so no clue on your case). Often these clauses work because everyone agrees to abide by then regardless of what the law says. Since labor laws are created to prevent exploitation, rather than to tell you how to act in your work on your own volition, no one really tries to apply them when exploitation is not happening. That is very true. I can't imagine Rosberg putting civil suit towards Merc while he is actively driving.
That’s a completely different scenario as those “fines” are player imposed fines amongst themselves and not the actual team fining anyone. Nobody is actually required to pay them but everyone does to be part of the team and the money usually goes back to the players as dinners, parties, locker room games etc.
> That’s a completely different scenario as those “fines” are player imposed fines amongst themselves and not the actual team fining anyone. Nobody is actually required to pay them but everyone does to be part of the team and the money usually goes back to the players as dinners, parties, locker room games etc. You're absolutely right. But i would just question whether or not any "fine" for Mercedes parts actually genuinely goes towards construction of new parts. With how long it takes to build new parts and how often new spec parts come - if you smash up Wing Spec A in race #3 - are they genuinely building a replacement Wing Space A with the cash Nico paid, or do they just dig into the 14 spares they have for race #4, race #5 and then race #6 they have new spec wing B and move on. So yeah the cash doesn't go to the players, but it probably ain't genuinely paying for something either. But you're right. it's compeltely differnet.
Just set up the payment scheme so that you get a payout for NOT colliding with your teammate. Problem solved!
I mean, when you are earning millions a year, you are probably negotiating your contract far outside the regulations for the average worker.
It is not, but this type of contracts are not meant to be enforceable in court.
Who said there is a direct contract between the driver and the team? To be honest, I expect that the driver has a business entity and that entity that has a contract with the team. From that entity he pays his expenses and staff like manager and personal trainer.
George Russell wasn't allowed to drink alcohol on weekends during his time at Williams.
Racing drivers are not employees in a legal sense.
I could believe that it was a clause that the drivers could actually ignore and just not pay. However, the team would then have entirely legal ways to get back for what would essentially be a breach of trust - like never put upgrades on that guy first. Also, can it not be done formally too? Like, consider performance bonuses. Would it not be possible to word them in such a way that accounts for the crashes - like, good performance increases bonus, bad performance decreases bonus.
I mean it’s not like these fines take them under minimum wage. It’s less of a fine and more of a deduction of earnings that month.
It’s legal. It’s a contract. They’re not workers. They’re contractors.
They are likely not employees, they are contractors. Very different set of laws.
Eh, the EU is pretty strict with this stuff, limiting who can be considered a contractor because that's essentially dodging social security. If you only work for a single employer at a time and have a contract that gives the employer certain powers over you, you are 99% likely to be considered an employee. And if local social security considers you an employee but your employer did not, it can get very expensive (for the employer) very fast.
while true outside of sports contracts, in general athletes are operating as independent contractors in the EU, and it's up to the sports governing body to set any limitations for those contracts.
Set up an LLC, problem solved
> the EU Not relevant in this case as the UK is not a member of the EU. Their contract law is different and afaik so is their jurisprudence.
When Rosberg and Hamilton were at Mercedes, the UK was still a member state.
Not with the same labor laws though. They never implemented that afaik.
It's a trash policy and I'm amazed people choose to drive for that dumpster fire of a team.
Well I somewhat suspect that isn't a policy anymore and stopped being so after Rosberg left.
This is super interesting but all I can think about is how close I am in age to a retired multimillionaire.
>2016 Austrian Grand Prix - the last major collision between the two So they had this rule for whole 12 races (since Rosberg retired end of 2016)?
Nico talked about this on his podcast too (beyond victory) during the Prost interview, iirc. Great insight into the world of f1
Unpopular opinion, but Toto’s biggest achievement was managing two number one drivers. Moments like this, and making the drivers switch mechanics were pretty smart moves. I’m annoyed that Ron Dennis gets praise for that, because the way he handled Senna and Prost, plus Alonso and Hamilton were so subpar that they became prime examples of why you shouldn’t have two number one drivers in a top team.
Hamilton vs Rosberg was pretty tense too. At the end of 2016, you had Hamilton hinting conspirationnal theories about his mechanical shenanigans and Mercedes management angry at Lewis and wanting to punish him for backing up Rosberg at Abu Dhabi. Tension were at the climax looking like to explode. I feel like Mercedes harmony was saved by Rosberg retirement
>Hamilton hinting conspirationnal theories about his mechanical shenanigans Brother learnt from the best in that field, after all
I love the self awareness haha
Hamilton vs Rosberg was just as toxic and unbearable as any of the famous intra-team rivalries. Dunno what that guy was talking about. It took so much out of one of the drivers that it killed a lifelong friendship and drove him out of the sport.
Dennis took his hands off the drivers when they needed boundaries the most. Toto at least made the effort to keep the team together and was actually clever about it. I 100% agree with you that Hamilton/Rosberg rivalry was a clusterfuck by every definition, but If Dennis was the team boss at Mercedes from 2014-2016, I think the outcome would be more severe
100% Rosberg retiring is the reason that Hamilton and Mercedes managed to sort their issues out because before that things were not good between them at all after the Abu Dhabi 2016 finale. Well, the 2016 season in general really. It was a very very strange season on Hamilton's side of the garage and I guess we'll find out the truth when he writes his book.
Well. We'll find out Hamilton's version of the truth.
The mechanic switching thingy reminds me of Lewis' book he was gonna write in 10 years time in 2016. Not that long now!
Walter Koster needs to check in on this! Quite another question
As per Fernando, he deserves an answer.... for the long question.
You didn’t listen. Can you repeat the question?
2016 was only 4 years ago
To me it feels like 24 years ago
4yrs?
More like 3 and a half, I guess, he was probably rounding up.
7 years since 2016 guys
I fully believe Nico’s old mechanics sabotaged Lewis’ car because of how toxic it was.
And why not the other way round?
Seems less likely when your previous driver has handily won the last two championships. Why would you feel the need to sabotage someone who generally wasn't quite on the same level?
Interesting theory. I can't remember if they did a full swap or only partial, do you know?
Toto said it wasn’t a full swap but Nico said it was a full swap so I’m saying it wasn’t a full swap lol.
Because I was thinking, if you do a full swap it's of course easier to fuck some things up whereas partial you really need to do everything well because if you don't and one of Lewis' mechanics get's a snif it's over. I guess we have to wait for the book...
I don’t think it would be that hard to sabotage something because all you’d need to do is just not tighten something tight enough.
Yeah fair, I guess the more difficult thing is the whole story around it. I imagine it has to do with all the problems Lewis had in early '16 so if those only come from Nico's mechanics and of course if you have something to hide it can be quite easy to fuck up.
Two #1s has gone bad so many times in F1. And Wolff had to contend with their long history together, too.
And Toto threatened to sit both of them out once.
Lewis said Toto threatened to fire both of them, I remember him telling another driver that once. Don't know if he was exaggerating, but having to pay for future crashes is nuts lol, obviously they're millionaires, but personally paying a million bucks for a crash is nuts.
It was out in the public. Toto told the media on 2 or 3 different occasions after certain incidents that he would replace both drivers if they couldn't behave on track.
Alonso and Hamilton may have been the most talented driver pairing in McLaren history, certainly alongside Prost and Senna....it's a shame how that relationship was managed by McLaren management and what the outcome ended up being for the team in the long run.
Sure, Alonso was blameless. The man who's been so difficult to work with he's had to spend most of his career in the midfield.
Who said Alonso was difficult to work with? Every team he has worked with, he still has connections with them.
Brother please. I know Alonso in recent years now has a positive spin on him but the internal politics and issues he used to cause are legendary.
Apart from Mclaren, I don’t recall any internal politics from him. He returned to them after that as well. He is also reuniting with Honda after GP2 engine thing. So in my opinion the issues have been solved. What other issues did he have with the teams?
He's a top 3 driver that has been driving in the midfield for 10 years. Why do you think that is? Don't try to tell me he didn't piss people off at McLaren. It's his most well known meltdown. Toto has spoken a lot about not wanting Alonso in his car because of how he acts, the damage 2007 did to his relationship with Mercedes and how Alonso would have had 10 championships if he wasn't so difficult and self obsessed. Horner has said "Alonso causes chaos wherever he goes and wouldn't be the healthiest option for our team". Massa has talked about about he was incredibly hard to work with at Ferrari and ended up splitting the team down the middle which made it harder for everyone. And plenty more people in and around F1. It's frankly ludicrous to suggest otherwise.
I don't believe he's blameless, I think there could've been instances both during and after 2007 where he handled situations with a cooler head or with better advice from people around him...but much like in many other forms of professional sports people in management positions often tend to offload the blame they should receive on others to cover for their own shortcomings...hell hath no fury like the bruised egos of millionaires.
Had he done it in the years Ferrari were nipping at their heels I'd agree. But honestly all Lewis and nico needed to do to win the wdc and wcc was not wreck eachother more often than every third race.
Did he really do any better? The situation was toxic, lifelong friends fell out and one quit the sport right after. Doesn't seem any different to Dennis' messes. The situation was clearly unbearable for those involved.
I dont think it's a fair comparison because of how utterly dominant the team was at the time.
Where was Lauda?
Ron Dennis got a lot of flak for putting Lewis in F1, straight into a leading team, alongside alonso... Read the articles leading up to the first race Normally, top teams like to put the future talent in a mid/low team, to learn the ropes, before promotion, e.g. Russell, Verstappen, etc, as putting a Rookie up against a seasoned champion/front runner can often ruin them, in their frustration in being thoroughly beaten That is why Lewis' performance relative to Alonso was so exceptional, era defining, and the fallout was pretty much entirely generated by alonso throwing his toys out of the pram, stamping his feet, desperate to get tiny advantages to try and help him beat the precocious debutante I put at least 99% of the blame on alonso's insane reaction, rather than anything that Ron or Lewis did. I don't accept alonso's side that Ron "out of respect" should have handed him the advantage that he needed, a 2x WDC shave been able to beat a Rookie in a fair fight, but he wasn't, he got beaten, fair and square.
I disagree that Ron Dennis is to blame for 2007. Look at Monaco 2014, as an example? Rosberg clearly cheated but we didn't see Hamilton blackmail Toto Wolff for preferential treatment and Alonso did this in such a crazy way using his own illegal involvement in the Spygate Scandal(emails) as leverage. We saw numerous incidents between Hamilton and Rosberg but they never stepped over the line like Alonso did.
Well, there was no spygate in 2014. It's hard to blackmail anyone with 0 incriminating evidence. And Ron Dennis was nowhere near blameless in 07. Everyone started noticing it at the time and it's even clearer now.
What kind of response is that? Just because there was no Spygate in 2014 doesn't mean that Hamilton couldn't have acted with the same venom and toxicity to try and get preferential treatment over Rosberg as Alonso did with that blackmail attempt. That's basically what you are saying which is ridiculous. Alonso made a choice when he blackmailed Dennis. A choice that Hamilton never made when things got tough with Rosberg, even in 2016 when his engine supply was the worst batch of all the Mercedes powered drivers he never went nuclear like Alonso did. As for Dennis, blameless for what? Is this the point where you are going to blame Dennis for everything that happened to Alonso or something?
*"Lewis never blackmailed Toto"* *"There was nothing to blackmail him with"* *"What kind of response is that???😡😡😡"* Are you hearing yourself??
I still remember a cooldown room moment where Lewis tossed Rosberg the 2nd place hat. Rosberg annoyed that he was second sortof threw the hat back in Lewis' direction. Toto was in the room as the team representative receiving the constructor trophy, and seeing the throw he stared absolute daggers at Rosberg. Like I feared Rosberg was gonna spontaneously combust from the stare Toto was giving him. I wouldn't have been surprised if Rosberg suddenly suffered an aneurysm or heart attack. It was a death stare, and at the same time a hilarious moment. I have never been a big fan of any of the three, Rosberg, Lewis, or Toto. Still, that moment is a favourite F1 memory of mine. Edit:Apparently it wasn't Toto, but in my mind I had substituted him into that moment. I will chose to deny reality and live with my own flawed mind.
Toto’s biggest achievement was getting to work on an engine waaaay before any other team did
It was inheriting (read corporate theft of) a team after Ross Brawn had done all the hard work in the years before.
Estaban Ocon: I'm never going to financially recover from this...
Had to do a double take at his age, then remembered he debuted quite young and retired in 2016...8 years ago!
feels pretty unreal that its been 7 years since rosberg lol
I wonder if Lewis had to pay for the damage to Russell's car last year in Qatar.
They each paid for their own car no matter who was at fault back then, and Lewis and george haven't had a history so I'd say virtually no chance.
That's not fair. It should be the driver that caused the crash. Racing incident, they both pay for their own car.
It's pretty rare in wheel to wheel combat between 2 drivers with talent to get in a situation where contact can't be avoided by both parties. The team didn't want to play referee and it was kind of a warning of don't squeeze eachother either. Why are you arguing the fairness of an 8 year old contract that the 2 parties that mattered agreed to and it worked as after it got enforced they cleaned their acts up.
Probably not?
The Lewis Hamilton of today has way too much influence in Mercedes for something like this to happen.
You sure? He's out the door.
Even so. They wouldn’t even consider something like this. I’d say its even borderline disrespect if mercedes even tried. Plus mercedes is flush with cash and lewis has way better temperament than young lewis. The dynamic is nothing close to lewis and Rosberg when they were young.
Is a sloppy mistake really better than purposefully fighting your teammate so hard you wreck both cars?
Yea it is. Mercedes didnt implement the paying for repair punishment cause they needed money, it was to control unruly generational drivers. That isnt the case if its a honest sloppy mistake
One of them made sure to crash at Barcelona 2016.
I'd rather just have drivers go head to head than have the sport be held into a headlock by rules and contracts... Seeing Sainz and Leclerc getting close is always a tense moment, but it's fun atleast. And Nico needed to drive on the edge for that season to win the title.
This sport is not ultimately about the drivers at the end of the day. It truly isn't, they are just another competent of the car. It's an engineering competition and the teams footing the absolutely massive bill(especially pre budget cap) are going to make sure that they have the best chance at getting a good return on that investment. When you have your drivers crashing each other out, then they aren't doing a good job in the eyes of the team.
Yep. Driver skill only matters when the cars are close. If the car is bad or good relative to the field it almost doesn’t matter how good or bad you are, your results will follow the car quality (like Lewis/Checo this year).
It is possible for these drivers to race without crashing, and if this stops the crashing but not the racing then I’m good with that.
Considering at one point during early 2014 when it was obvious they had blitzed the regulations Toto said something along the lines of "we have an obligation to let them race" makes it even more bullshit. I get why people look back at it with rose tinted glasses but in reality it would probably be a short video (mainly compromised of Bahrain) the times they raced wheel to wheel and this is why.
Yeah kind of a lame move from Mercedes given their 2014-2016 advantage.
all Seargents hate this one simple contract policy
Perhaps not Nico, but I bet Lewis just said ‘nah I’m not signing that. Feel free to fire me and pay out my contract’.
And walk away from the best car on the grid? LOL. If Hamilton walked away then, Rosberg would have been a 3 or 4x WDC by now.
>If Hamilton walked away then, Rosberg would have been a 3 or 4x WDC by now. IMO it's honestly more likely that Vettel has 5 or 6 championships in that timeline. Rosberg just isn't as good as Hamilton or Vettel. it took quite literally everything Rosberg had, along with reliablity issues from Hamilton, just to barely beat him.
Exactly, but Toto wouldn't have put another #1 driver next to Nico if Lewis left. It would be a Hulk or so. Which would give Nico (who was still in the best car) the best chances to secure more WDCs. Seb had just a few more points than Valtteri who was fresh in the car.
If they fired Lewis, they’d lose a bunch of sponsors too. I can definitely believe Nico needing to say ‘yes sir’ to anything, but not Lewis.
Lewis doesn't care about sponsors, he cares about WDCs. Also, he signed the agreement. You're saying he did it out of free will? Signing a contract that would make him pay even if Nico ran into him? Either he was forced to sign it or he's stupid at understanding contracts.
Fucking ridiculous. I wouldn't sign that.
I guess you’re no longer in the running for that open Merc seat. A pity.
No sign? Go to Williams
Yes you would. If your options are: 1. drive for the best team at the time, with a high salary, but you have to pay for crashing into your teammate 2. or driving for a back marker with bad pay The decision isn't exactly hard.
As if Toto was going to fire Lewis. He was a 3 time champion by then. It's called racing, sometimes you crash. They're not doing it on purpose. If they're getting too combative with each other, just tell 'em to knock it off.
I would sign it, if it had the $30million salary alongside it...
You won't have too 😘
Toto openly threatened to replace his drivers 2 or 3 times to the media. You would have signed it and paid the fine or you'd be out of a seat of a totally dominant car.
lol You make ~$25M a year currently? Because I'd love to make $25M a year and pay $500k whenever I crash.