You realise bluesky is brand new to millions of users... right...

It's not like twitter or facebook that has been around for a decade.

Yes, stewards make bad decisions, this isn't one of them. No narrative here, just want the right decisions, which this is.

Max has got away without many penalties for the last few years for even blatantly obvious incidents. This is being used as proof of Max bias, which is very clearly not the case

So 1 is proof that it isn't to do with impeding

2 is further proof. If it had been an impeding penalty it would have been 3 places.

The mitigation is Russell had visibility. Max was still driving unnecessarily slow.

I'm taking my words from the Stewards and the documents they wrote lol. Just because you have confirmation bias from a journalist that inserted your favourite word into an Instagram post doesn't make you right.

Nothing to do with impeding. 33.4 doesn't mention impeding. Her over it.

Yes, I know...

Last I checked she wasn't a Steward nor an FIA member that wrote the decision document.

Her interpretation doesn't prove you right any more than if I used David Coulthard.

Ah yes, lets get our penalty advice from Instagram.

He didn't have to let anyone by. That's the point. It wasn't necessary to drive that slow.

Agree or disagree with the punishment handed out. He broke the driving unnecessarily slowly or in a dangerous manner rule.

Grid penalty/no grid penalty could be debated for weeks. He broke the rules, no it wasn't for impeding.

That's not how any of this works.

If Max was at or the right side of his Delta he would have been fine. But he wasn't. It was unnecessary to drive that slow. Hence the penalty.

Wrong.

This has nothing to do with impeding. Those drivers were let off because they were slower than their Delta because they had to slow for cars on a lap.

Max didn't have to slow for cars on a fast lap. He did slow for no reason I.e. unnecessary.

Stop with the impeding. Nothing to do with it.

Read the decision document. The stewards have said why others were not penalised.

The word impede does not appear in the decision document.

The penalty was not for impeding.

He had no reason to be going that slowly, hence the penalty.

It created a dangerous situation, hence the penalty point.

It's not complicated.

If you read the decision document you would understand why.

Max wasn't getting out of the way of a car on a lap, hence his driving so slowly was unneccesary.

It wasn't a penalty for impeding...

It's not a penalty for impeding...

Also fair. If you could just get the f1 channel for less then great. But you can't.

There are ways