Apr.5 - Many of Fernando Alonso's rivals at Suzuka were planning an awkward official drivers' briefing for the two-time champion.

George Russell says he bumped into the Spaniard in a coffee shop last week following their incident and his big crash in Melbourne - after stewards penalised Alonso for what many are calling a clear case of an illegal and dangerous move.

"Did you brake test him there or not?" Max Verstappen joked to Russell on Thursday.

Some drivers, however, sided with 42-year-old Alonso. "What Fernando did was strange and extreme," said Lando Norris, "but I don't think it even came close to being considered a brake test."

Alonso's friend and countryman Carlos Sainz, meanwhile, blamed Melbourne's Albert Park layout, insisting the amount of run-off at a 250kph bend "needs to be reviewed".

Sergio Pérez and Nico Hulkenberg, however, were much more scathing of Alonso's behaviour.

"I believe Fernando crossed the line with his actions," Perez admitted.

Hulkenberg, meanwhile, said in the Suzuka paddock: "I wasn't that impressed by Fernando's manoeuvres. Some of his statements don't add up for me either.

"But it was the wrong corner for games."

As for triple world champion Verstappen, he said simply: "We'll discuss it in the drivers' briefing."

For his part, a typically defiant Alonso insisted the penalty "won't change the way we drive or our approach to racing", and predicts the stewards won't impose a similar penalty in future.

"There is no obligation to complete all 57 laps the same way," he charged.

Valtteri Bottas agrees: "To be honest, I was quite surprised by the punishment. If George hadn't ended up in the wall, there probably wouldn't have been anything.

"It looked pretty dramatic, but I think we should always be able to choose the speed and the line. But it's a fine line," the Finn acknowledged.

Ferrari's Charles Leclerc, though, commented: "My opinion is that it is something we do as drivers. But not to that extent.

"What Fernando did in Australia went too far and he had to be penalised."

Finally, Kevin Magnussen said: "I wasn't in either Alonso's or Russell's car, but to me it didn't look like it was just Alonso's fault.

"The main thing we want is consistent penalties, but they seem to be a bit harsher this year. Yeah, I was a little surprised."


✅ Check out more posts with related topics:

7 F1 Fan comments on “Rivals Plot Awkward Suzuka Showdown for Alonso

  1. Jere Jyrälä

    Penalizing him was still the wrong decision, especially as Russell directly admitted to not paying attention on the road ahead.
    Perez's & Norris' views were somewhat different, though, & more towards blaming Russell, but runoff definitely is an issue, as are barrier & exit curb placements, so simply move the curb & white line further outwards, i.e., leftwards, so that cars' natural trajectory would meet them & likewise barriers as further outwards as possible, & why not even replace the gravel with a full tarmac runoff just to minimize risks of bouncing back on track.

    Reply
    • Cutting Corners

      Quite true.
      Russell was either watching an advert on the wheel or TV guide.
      The hyperbole of "erratic" driving used in the meeting was downgraded ,I believe to the even more ridiculous charge of POSSIBLY dangerous driving.

      Alonso was always in control of his car, Russell n not so.

      Reply
          • Cutting Corners

            There media pick up on things like erratic and aggravated etc in initial discussions in stewards room by one or more stewards.

            BUT this is their decision.

            This is from the FIA site stewards report, pages long.

            ....."he drove in a manner that was at
            very least “potentially dangerous” given the very high speed nature of that point of the
            track."

            Me.
            This resulted in application of a drive through penalty that couldn't be applied and 3 points on his licence.

            I did ask for the minutes to see which stewards said what,if one steward was driving this. Obviously it doesn't take hours if they all agree.

            You know transparency not a two page document that supposedly reflects the more than two hours deliberation.

            But it seems they have gone opaque and lowered the cone of silence.

What's your F1 fan opinion?

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Please follow our commenting guidelines.