Fifth Column: Nigel Roebuck
Until the rules on track limits are enforced consistently, or flouting them puts a driver at a disadvantage, they’ll continue to be disregarded
IN AUSTIN MAX VERSTAPPEN, HAVING PASSED KIMI Raikkonen for third place on the last lap, looked suitably exhilarated as he awaited the podium ceremony with Lewis Hamilton and Sebastian Vettel, but his expression swiftly changed when Raikkonen entered the room, and someone advised Max that he should leave.
As we know, Verstappen had ‘exceeded track limits’ as he snicked past the Ferrari, and that being so, the stewards had no alternative but to penalise him. Their decision was not well received, for Max’s move on Kimi had been beautifully executed, but inescapably all four of the Red Bull’s wheels were ‘off the track surface’ at the time.
Christian Horner pointed out that this was the sort of racing fans were crying out for, and Niki Lauda described the stewards’ decision as the worst he could remember. On an emotional level, I entirely agreed with them, but rules are rules, and you can’t ignore them as it suits you.
What you can complain about with this particular rule, though, is a lack of consistency in its application. For one thing, at some circuits it seems to be more fiercely in force than at others; for another, some incidents are punished, while others slip under the radar.
When you think about it, a rule like this might have been conceived to cause controversy, and it exists, of course, as a consequence of the endless quest for greater safety. Back in the day I would stand for Monaco qualifying at the left-hander leading into the swimming pool complex, and marvel at the raw courage and commitment of Ayrton Senna as he hurtled into the turn. At that time a solid wall awaited if you got it wrong, so there was a powerful incentive to get it right. Now, though, the masonry is gone, replaced by white lines on the Tarmac, and the need for precision and bravery is inevitably reduced.
A couple of years ago, on the phone to Chris Amon, I brought up the contentious subject of track limits, and got a typically laconic response: “Well, in my day walls and trees seemed to work pretty well…” Self-preservation is a powerful instinct, and assuredly such features around a track instilled discipline, but if ‘something broke’ the consequences were very different from skating into a huge runoff area bordered by tyre barriers.
We are now at the other extreme, and one which brings back to me Support Your Local Sheriff, a comedy western starring the lamented James Garner, in whose town a new jail had been built, but not completed.
“Magnussen, whose idol is Stirling Moss, thinks he was born too late”
Lacking bars for the cells, Garner chalked lines on the floor, advising inmates they should not cross them – and guess what, they took no notice.
No-one ever campaigned for safety more than Jackie Stewart, but even he thinks the situation, at modern circuits, has gone too far. “Everyone wants to see great racing, with more overtaking, although the fundamental problem is always ignored: the aerodynamics have to change.
“The way the cars are these days, overtaking – except in a straight line with DRS – is extremely difficult, so it’s not surprising to see the track limits, defined only by lines or small kerbs, being exceeded. As well as that, almost all the new circuits in the last 20-odd years have not been designed to encourage overtaking.
“For a long time there was no penalty for running wide – whether by accident or design – and using way more than the intended racing surface, and that had to change: making a mistake should not mean injury or death, but it should categorically mean you’re going to lose out.
“I don’t want to create accidents, God knows, but if proper rumble strips or whatever were put in the exit of a corner, drivers wouldn’t be able to make an error with impunity, and nor, with something similar at the apex, would they go off the racing surface to overtake. Risking a penalty is one thing: knowing that going beyond the track limits will cost you time is quite another.”
Illegal it may have been, but Verstappen’s pass of Raikkonen in Texas was like sleight of hand, and he was still seething about his penalty when he got to Mexico. Add in that he was mortified to miss out on pole position, and that on the grid he was between Hamilton and Vettel, the last men standing in the championship, and it was no surprise that in the opening seconds he was utterly uncompromising. With nothing to lose, he sat it out with Vettel at the first right-left, and emerged with a lead he never lost: it was a glorious drive.
Finishing ninth, after the contretemps with Vettel on the first lap, was obviously not how Hamilton would have wished to clinch his fourth world championship, but, given the outcome of the day, he won’t dwell on a rare forgettable race.
Verstappen apart, I thought the outstanding drive in Mexico came from Magnussen, who finished eighth for Haas. In the team they think highly of Kev, not least because, unlike Romain Grosjean, he doesn’t moan all the time, and simply gets on with the job.
This is indeed an old-fashioned racer, not given to political correctness. “I’ve never,” he said to me, “been to an ‘old school’ track that I didn’t like. They’re more fun than modern circuits – and one thing that definitely makes them better is when there’s no runoff. Everyone has a brain, so you know if you go off it’s going to hurt – of course you don’t want to get hurt, but no matter how you look at it, it’s a choice: if we make it safer, we make it less exciting. It’s as clear as that.”
Magnussen, whose idol is Stirling Moss, thinks he was born too late, that he should have been a grand prix driver in the 1950s or ’60s. I’d say he was right.