Christian Horner insists that his team's criticism of Lewis Hamilton and the bid to have his penalty reviewed was "nothing personal".

The Briton was speaking as the Silverstone fallout continues, a situation not helped by comments allegedly made by Red Bull in their bid to have the Silverstone incident reviewed and the revelation that some of the language used was aimed at tarnishing Lewis Hamilton's reputation.

Justifying the bid to have the incident reviewed, Horner said: "Obviously there is the right to review that we utilised because we felt that, having looked at the data from the accident and the severity of the accident... there was data that wasn't available at the time of the stewards making their decision.

"We presented that data to the stewards," he continued. "They gave us a fair hearing where we were talked through that data, the positioning of the cars, the speed of the cars, the fact that Lewis would have had to have braked 23 metres earlier to have even made the corner, the fact that Max was on the same trajectory as identical to that of Charles Leclerc, that the result with Charles would have been identical had Lewis taken the same approach.

"The stewards felt that it wasn't new evidence under the confines of the regulations and so it wasn't opened into another hearing, so we accept that.

"This competition is all about marginal gains and leaving no stone unturned," he added. "And of course, when you have an accident of that velocity and impact, then of course, you're going to make a full investigation.

"But as far as we're concerned the chapter is now closed, the stewards have made their ruling and we now very much focus on this weekend and the remaining part of the championship."

However, it is the language used by the likes of Horner and Helmut Marko that has clearly rankled, especially the description of the seven-time world champion as an "amateur".

"It's absolutely not a personal attack on Lewis Hamilton," Horner insisted. "Lewis Hamilton is a seven-time world champion, and everything that he's achieved stands for itself. If it was any other competitor on the grid, we would have taken the same issue in the manner that we did.

"Obviously at the time emotions are running high," he admitted. "We've got a driver that's needing to be taken to hospital for precautionary checks after an accident which would have definitely knocked out your average human being. We've lost a car in its entirety under a budget cap environment for something that the stewards didn't deem to be Max's fault.

"So there's nothing personal about it. But even a seven-time world champion can sometimes make mistakes, or misjudgements. That's just a fact of life, but at no point has this been personal about Lewis."

Check out our Friday gallery from the Hungaroring, here.

LATEST NEWS

more news >

LATEST IMAGES

galleries >

Click to go to the main galleries section

READERS COMMENTS

1. Posted by kenji, 01/08/2021 0:55

"@ ChickenFarmer. That's all cool. Where would we be if we all agreed? Re enactments by virtue of what they are can never be 100% identical. They are a valid attempt to establish, as closely as possible, a repeat of a certain action/activity in order for validation. The main elements i would think would be angle of attack and speed relative to a known position of the other car and of course track topography. Other external elements can be successfully applied by accessing stored data from the real incident. It's not rocket science as Mad Matt seems to suggest and IMO,it was not a complete farce as you suggest, in fact far from it. Just as a reference...scientific theory is based on re enactments/replication to establish facts as opposed to fallacy. Enjoy the race...."

Rating: Neutral (0) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

2. Posted by ChickenFarmerF1, 31/07/2021 17:51

"@kenji - no, I’m not suggesting the re-enactment was of no value. I’m explicitly stating it was a complete farce with less than zero value. You clearly disagree. That’s ok. "

Rating: Neutral (0) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

3. Posted by Mad Matt, 31/07/2021 8:21

"Sorry, I just read another article and it now looks like the car was from this year but I think my point still stands :-)"

Rating: Positive (1) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

4. Posted by Mad Matt, 31/07/2021 8:18

"I have to say the re-enactment does seem to be a bit of a farce. A different car from a different year with a different set-up on different tyres driving in different track and weather conditions with a different driver... hardly a very accurate re-enactment.

This story is developing into pantomime :-) "

Rating: Positive (3) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

5. Posted by kenji, 31/07/2021 6:09

"@ Chickenfarmer...Some rather caustic rhetoric there! In a nutshell...are you saying that 're enactments' have no value? Interesting..."

Rating: Negative (-2) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

6. Posted by kenji, 31/07/2021 0:50

"@ Redphyve....'for what everyone agrees is an racing incident'. Wrong."

Rating: Negative (-2) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

7. Posted by Redphyve, 30/07/2021 23:20

"Correction to my previous...

I meant to say Mad Marko...not Max. Max Verstappen is not who I am referring to. Its Helmut Marko...You know, the guy who actually runs Red Bull Racing."

Rating: Positive (1) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

8. Posted by Redphyve, 30/07/2021 23:11

"Bull-dookey Mr Horner sir. It's not personal? You name and shame LH as an amateur and rookie. Calling for punishment far in excess of for what everyone agrees is an racing incident.

You manufacture evidence to suit your needs and then expect this new "evidence" to be accepted as part of what happened almost a week ago.

You and Mad Max have no gravitas, no class, no dignity. Take a lesson from the calm measured redponse from Mercedes and Toto. Or not. You choose."

Rating: Positive (1) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

9. Posted by ChickenFarmerF1, 30/07/2021 18:01

""Max was on the same trajectory as identical to that of Charles Leclerc, that the result with Charles would have been identical had Lewis taken the same approach."

Oh, and Lewis was much farther back going into Copse when he passed Leclerc, and yet it worked out! Granted more because Leclerc made a small mistake and nearly oversteered off. But still, if he hadn't had that mistake it's unlikely they would have crashed even if Hamilton had taken the same line as lap 1. Give it up Horner. Your boy was at least partially at fault for the contact. He turned in tighter just before the contact. Had he turned in just a little less there wouldn't have been contact, but Verstappen would have not have been able to hold the lead after Copse. This is what you call hard racing. Verstappen assumed Hamilton would back out. Hamilton assumed Verstappen would back out. Hamilton might have been slightly more at fault and got a 10 second penalty as a result. End of issue (or should be at least)."

Rating: Positive (3) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

10. Posted by ChickenFarmerF1, 30/07/2021 17:46

""the fact that Lewis would have had to have braked 23 metres earlier to have even made the corner"

Is that based on the farcical Albon "simulation" of Hamilton's line? Horner makes clowns look too serious."

Rating: Positive (3) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

11. Posted by BOF, 30/07/2021 17:32

""So there's nothing personal about it. But even a seven-time world champion can sometimes make mistakes, or misjudgements. That's just a fact of life, but at no point has this been personal about Lewis."
Of course, there's nothing personal there; Christian is talking about Michael Schumacher! 🤥"

Rating: Negative (-1) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

Horner: It was nothing personal

LATEST NEWS

RELATED ARTICLES

LATEST IMAGES

POST A COMMENT

Post your comment

READERS COMMENTS

Share this page