The Late Braking F1 Podcast - Our thoughts on the post-Canadian GP stewarding verdicts!

Episode Date: June 18, 2025

There's more fallout from the Canadian GP, and Ben and Sam are here to break it all down - from Red Bull's failed protest against Russell, to Norris avoiding penalty points after clashing with Piastri. They also dive into the media heat on Vasseur, Derek Warwick's suspension from stewarding, and wrap things up by sharing their Top 3 Charles Leclerc wins... FOLLOW us on socials! You can find us on ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠X (Twitter)⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠TikTok⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ SUPPORT our ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Patreon⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ for bonus episodes JOIN our ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Discord⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ community JOIN our ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠F1 Fantasy League⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ EMAIL us at [e-mail]   & SUBSCRIBE to our podcast! TIDE: Save more, earn more—up to 4.22% AER (variable). Interest rates are tiered, with the top rate for balances over £1M. Each tiered rate applies to the portion within that range. New Tide members get these rates free for 6 months; after that, your Tide plan’s rates apply. For full offer T&Cs visit ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠tide.co/savings⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

At Desjardin, we speak business. We speak equipment modernization. We're fluent in data digitization and expansion into foreign markets. And we can talk all day about streamlining manufacturing processes. Because at Desjardin business, we speak the same language you do. Business. So join the more than 400,000 Canadian entrepreneurs who already count on us. And contact Desjardin today.

We'd love to talk, business. Thank you for listening to the late-breaking F-1 podcast. Make sure to check out new episodes every Wednesday and every Sunday. Welcome to the late-breaking F-1 podcast presented by Sam Sage and me, Ben Hocking, on this midweek episode. No race coming up this weekend, Sam, but we're still, I mean, full disclosure, we're recording this one a little bit earlier in the week, so we're still dealing with the aftermath of the Canadian GP. We are, and it's been juicy, there's been lots to talk about. We're going to talk about some of what happened.

in the Kenya Grand Prix. You know, we've got penalty talk coming up. We've got chat about Ferrari as well. I love a little non-week, mid-week chat, actually. Because of how congested the calendar is, and how many races we get, it's kind of nice sometimes just to have a moment to simmer a doom and to digest what's going on.

So we've got a lot to get into. Yes, absolutely. But before we get there, and apologies for all of you who will get increasingly sick of us talking about it for the next forever. But we are going back to Austin for the United States Grand Prix.

And tickets are now on sale for our live show, for those of you that are on Patreon on our middle or upper tier. So if you're already there, a post went out a couple of days ago, as this is going out to you now, and just, yeah, you can follow the link. Make sure you get your tickets. And you've got just under two weeks until they go on general sale. So make sure you take advantage if you're not already on Patreon. Make sure you join up and join us there.

because we'd love to see you. They already sell in that hot cakes, Blank. They're already selling. Is it still hot cakes? I thought it was hot potatoes. I'm not getting into the WhatsApp group chat. Let's move on. Let's move on to Red Bull because we recorded our review on Sunday.

We were loving life. Happy as Larry just before 11 o'clock. Everything's done and dusted. And then all of a sudden, Red Bull are protesting the results. Of course, George Russell won that Grand Prix. Max Verstapp and Finlay. his second, but Red Bull decided to go ahead with a protest. But George Russell has kept his Canadian GP victory after the Stewart rejected the protest against him. Red Bull accused Russell of

driving erratically under the safety car and committing unsportsmanlike conduct by trying to get Vastappen penalised. Stewart sided with Mercedes stating, we accept the driver of car 63's explanation of the incident, and we are satisfied that the driver of Car 63 did not drive erratically by breaking where he did or to the extent he did. We are not satisfied that by simply reporting to his team that Car One had overtaken, that he engaged in unsportsmanlike conduct. Did Red Bull have a case here? This whole situation borders on the cheeky scale. It was a little a bit cheeky the whole thing, you know. Don't be shy.

Thank you to cheeky girl number one, Ben Hocking. Yes. Yeah, none of it is concrete. You know, if it was a case, it would all be circumstantial evidence. It's all a bit of, oh, he did this, oh, they did that. And I think the reason behind it is this. And none of that is concrete proof. And they've gone through and they've checked the data that they do actually have,

the breaking, where he was on circuit. He's leading the pack. he's got every right to maintain the pace. And Max Verstappen doesn't have to be super close to George Russell. You know, you could be within 10 car lengths. He's allowed to sit eight carlets back for as long as he wants, if that's what he wants. And you've got to remember at this point,

the safety car isn't coming in either at this point. It's very firmly in front of George Russell. It's not like he's doing the restart at this point. They're just behind the safety car. Now, I do think George Russell was a little bit cheeky. I think there was maybe 10% at the back of his mind that thought, he's already stated, didn't he? You're going to bring a pre-race interview.

I've got more points to play with than Max Verstappen. It was on his mind. He was maybe 10% trying to goad Max into a silly move or a bit of contact or anything that might cost him. But also, George Russell has so much more to lose than Max Verstappen in this situation, I think. Because if he does cause contact, Max Verstappen has got all the rights to sit there.

Well, you saw him break check me. You've got the data. He's hit the brakes when I'm right behind him. You can work that out. I haven't done that intentionally. He probably will have got away with it. Russell will have lost his race wing, and it will just be silly.

What I don't love, I also find hilarious, is the immediate jumping on the radio to winge like a school child that's just seeing someone be really gnaughty. Miss, miss, they took my sweeties or something like that. It felt a bit like George Russell and Mimi,

he went, he overtook me. He ever took me under safety car. I'm like, oh, come on, we've got enough cameras around there. Why is you necking? You can see that if he did anything wrong, they'll work it out. So I didn't love that.

But nonetheless, I don't think Maxis for stopping anything wrong. I think he was caught out slightly by George Russell warming up his breaks. And I also don't think George Russell did anything wrong by trying to warm up his breaks. They're just a couple of wheege bags where it comes to radio. And they'll do anything to try and get themselves in front. And I don't blame them for it, although it is quite funny. Ben, what did you think? I wanted to sort of start by just making a bit of a point more generically about these protests

that happen from teams after a Grand Prix has finished. And it's not even specific to just this incident. It is difficult for the team that is protesting because they're not just going up against the team that they are protesting against. They're often going up against the FIA themselves because you are having to almost say within what you're accusing the other team of that the FIA didn't pick up on something that they should have done, which I know the stewards are an independent body, but that they are still part of the FIA. and there is going to be some natural bias there. So if you read the notes about this protest, it will go through what the accusation from Red Bull is. It will go through what Mercedes are claiming in their defense.

But then it will also have stewards notes. And as part of the stewards notes, they essentially say from the control room, rather than the stewards, we didn't note it. We saw it, but decided there wasn't enough to then raise it to the stewards, to then make a call during the race rather than Red Bull having to protest it afterwards. It's difficult when you're the team going up against the FIA, but also needing the FIA to get your way.

In terms of this very particular instance, I have to be honest, I don't think they have a massive case here, Red Bull. And I appreciate with my view, adding on to your view, that is going to lead to some British bias comments, which I can't wait for. But equally, it doesn't change what I think on this. There was also talk of George Russell outside of just the erratic driving and passing

under safety car and all that. There was also the potential accusation of him being more than 10 car lengths behind the safety car on a few occasions. That wasn't part of the protest in the end because I think Red Bull realized that George Russell was, in all instances, driving to his Delta. and at any point he fell outside of 10 car lengths, he was just, you go back and listen to the team radio, he's just, I'm following my delta.

Like, I can't go any closer without breaking that. So I think that's why they didn't include that as part of the protest. But in terms of what they did accuse him of, the erratic driving, I just don't quite see it that way. You know, George Russell was on the back of the safety car. He wanted the safety car to go faster. So was Vastappen. Vestappen and Russell were quite animated in their cockpits to keep going.

Like, we need you to go faster. George Russell creates that gap. But because of how close Vastappen is at that point, he's probably not expecting it as much as it did. Vestappen was asked about this after the race. He wasn't angry. He just, in an interview, he said it led to some confusion. But in terms of how angry Vastappen can get, it wasn't like a three out of ten, let alone a ten. Yeah, I was going to say two out of ten

It's one of those where if you're the driver behind Why would you not be a bit sneaky And try and gain something out of it? I totally understand the motivation behind it I don't put any blame on the staffing here at all I don't think he didn't act inappropriately Or anything like that And I agree, I think Russell handled it as well as he could

When you're that close to the safety car And trying to match deltas, etc. Do you think there's I hate to use the word We're getting a little bit soft With what we're complaining about When it comes to F1 Because games gone

Oh, God. I'll bring it back. Bring the old school F on back. Wouldn't have even been a yellow 30 years ago. Do you think this is a bit too wingy, a bit too soft to make a complaint? Should we just get on with it? It is a bit wingery, but it's also from both sides as well. But also, it's not an isolated incident. They're all wingy, or at least like 90% of them are. And unfortunately, there's not much you can do about it, apart from not rising to it.

So many team radio messages, not just the two that we're talking about here, but so many team radio messages and not even communication between the driver and their engineer. It's more driver talking to the stewards by medium of the engineer. It's like, he did this just to let you know. The amount of like the pit, the pit lane ones, the one that really get me like, he, he just cut across me there at 10 miles an hour just to let you know. It's like, great, noted. We'll raise it's like, come on. It is all a bit whiny and wingy and I don't want to see races decided by, you know, Vastappen overtaking George Russell for what was probably less than half a second and then

going back to his original spot. It's just why. You can make, as in life, you can make a basic mistake that is simply a basic mistake with no malice or anything horrible behind it. I just rectify it instantly. and get about your day. And sometimes it can just be that. Yeah, I just don't think we need to get caught up in these sorts of details.

And like when it comes to the gamesmanship or sportsmanship debate that's going on with George Russell here, you know, the stewards are essentially saying, you know, Russell acknowledging what had happened is not proof that it was sportsmanship, which is correct. Even if you think it was sportsmanship, him identifying it can't by itself be classed as proof. Because if you want to go around penalising drivers based on them establishing what has happened and where they think they've been wronged, you'd be handing out a lot of penalties every single race. Yeah, drivers would happenly be quite biased towards themselves, I imagine. You say 10% do you think 10% sportsmanship, 90%?

and genuine. Is that where you're landing? I think so. I think there's always a part of them that wants to get something out of it. I don't think they're doing it for the love of sportsmanship. I don't think they're going into the game

and they're thinking, I shall point out any any misdemeanors, any poor behavior will get reporting straight to the head teacher, although that does reconsider something George Russell would definitely have done. Oh, above anyone else as well. Yeah.

He would have been the school prefect and the corridor monitor. I go, Hall Monitor Russell. Hall monitor Russell. Go back to your. your lessons, move. No.

That's George Russell for you. I think they're clever in how they approach sport. I think they're clevering how they approach the rules. And as I said, they want a wing. And so I don't blame them for acting in the way that they are because it's, it's big fruit before, right? You can have a wing and suddenly someone does go, oh, yeah, okay, we'll have a look. And suddenly that person gets a penalty.

And suddenly you're running advantage. And that's why you suddenly get these cryptic, well, I said cryptic, they're pretty easy to work out what's going on. But cryptic messages over the radio of, oh, that wasn't very good, or, oh, they shouldn't have been doing X, Y, and Z. And you see, you hear the engineer, yeah, we're on it, we're on it.

And that means reporting it. That means making it aware to the stewards that something that's happened. And they only do it because they stand to game. So even if George Russell has gone, he's overtaken me there. He didn't need to alert it. It was over before he'd even smoke at his mouth.

Verstappel was already back behind him. He didn't need to bring it up, but there's definitely a little. but he wouldn't have mentioned it if he wasn't aiming to get something out of it because it was already resolved for the time he sent the radio message. So that's why I'm a little bit skeptical. It's not just them trying to abide by the rules. The other incident that was wrapped up a little bit after our review was wrapped up on Sunday

was the incident between the two McLaren drivers. If you've been living under a rock, Lando Norris crashed into the back of Oscar Piastri, which ended his race, but didn't end the race of his teammate. They still, even though Lando Norris essentially retired on the spot from this incident, they still needed to do the proper review. And they went with a five second time penalty for Lando Norris. Of course, Lando Norris was out of the race. So a five second time penalty could have been 5,000.

It wouldn't have impacted him whatsoever. But again, they still need to come down with the appropriate response. Was this the appropriate response? I don't love the term British bias. Oh, then we take the Mickey out of it. And off air, folks, used to see how much we'd take the Mickey out of British bias. It is one of our most favorite running jokes where because we're British, obviously it's assumed that we favour British drivers.

I think on this podcast, we are traditionally quite fair with how we approach our views. This was so wrong, so light for Landon Norris. Ridiculously light for Landon-Ongu. Now, you compare it to Max Verstapel and he hit George Russell in Spain. And we know there was intention behind that contact, right? We know that. And we know that with Landon Norris, there was not intention behind the contact. I want you to remove the intention from your minds when dealing with it.

Look at what happened with the contact of the cars and how it took place. Landon Norris was going down a straight. He drives straight into the back of him at full speed. And it could particularly have wiped out himself, it did, and one other driver. In Spain, no one was removed from the race. both were able to finish the race, and yes, okay, there was the intentional bit, but the damage, and that's what we need to look at, the contact was in theory lighter. Max Verstappen picks up a 10-second penalty, and I believe he picked up three penalty points on his license for that.

Ladder Norris, five-second penalty, no penalty points on his license for this. I genuinely think that now a lot of people need to get, say, well, what's the point anyway, while we're giving him a penalty anyway, doesn't affect him, because it's enforcing the rules. Whether it actually affects him or not, it's enforcing the rules and being fair on the rule, and being balanced on the rule set. Landon-in-orish, you have had a 10-second penalty, and she'll have had three penalty points, I believe, on his license for that race.

It was poor, it was bad driving, it was reckless, and it could have ruined one, two, potentially more drivers. We were close together at that point. Antingale's half a second down the road. If a car happens to go the wrong way due to that contact and go off into the runoff and across the road, it maybe hits Antingeli.

There's a lot of risk. There's a lot of damage that could be at place here. I think they were awfully light with this decision. I really do think that as much as it wouldn't have made any impact on the overall race position, because he was out of the Grand Prix, I still think to make the point of consistency, he should have had at least a 10 second time, Pengleton. What do you think, Ben? Here's what I think.

I was, after the Canadian GP, I became aware of the Red Bull protesting that we've just gone through. And I realized, oh, no, this might affect who wins this race. therefore, I'm going to have to stay up until this is decided in case we need to put something at the top of the episode to say it was recorded before the race result was changed, etc, etc. Which, of course, the FIA, in their infinite wisdom, decide to evaluate all of the incidents as they are reported to them. And because that one happened post-race, that was the last one that they got to.

So essentially I was watching as all of the other incidents, including all of the potential safety car violations, the bearman unsafe rejoin, all of these other maybe smaller incidents were being looked at first. That includes what we're talking about here. And I thought at I think it was two o'clock in the morning, maybe quarter past two in the morning, I am way too tired and I am misreading what is in front of me. I woke up this morning and I was not. It's just stupid. This is insanity. It's one of those rare forms of, it's almost beautifully poetic. Like, the more you look at it, the more wrong it gets. Firstly, I'll tackle the thing that I don't mind, which is one very specific thing. A lot of people have asked, why is this a time penalty and not a grid drop? I understand that it looks a bit weird because a time penalty, again, it wouldn't matter if it was multiplied by, 10 the amount of seconds, it wouldn't have affected his race. But based on him being classified, classified being he does more than 90% of the race, I understand why it's a time penalty and not a

grid drop. And as long as they are consistent about that, every single time a penalty needs to be applied to someone who is classified but not finish the race, I'm okay with that. That's the bit I don't have a problem with. Everything else I've got a massive problem with. So, firstly, how is that five seconds. That is a 10 second penalty. Five seconds. I understand that McClara are not going to be lobbying for this to be 10 seconds, but you have to ignore that. You have to just review the incident as it is, not review who's involved, where they're at in the championship. You've just got to review the incident on its merits. And the merits are 10 second time penalty. No way, that's ever five seconds. Secondly, the reasoning, because the reasoning is even worse. I'm direct

quote here from the FIA document. Because the collision had no immediate and obvious sporting consequence, we imposed a five second post-race time penalty on Car 4. You cannot assign these penalties based on whether they have sporting consequence. That is not okay. I'll use the same example. You did. The Vastappan and Russell won. Vestappen and Russell, again, intent, take away intent just for the moment and just look at the incident itself on its merits. Was there sporting consequence? No? No.

Russell still finished where he was going to finish anyway. So why doesn't it apply to that situation and so many other situations where there's just no consistency about whether it matters or not? It utterly baffles me. You should never, ever look at the sporting consequence and go, we have to up or lower the penalty based on this. This should have been 10 seconds. It absolutely should have been the three penalty points.

How he's got away without a penalty point is beyond me. This is amateur hour yet again from the... Did Lance Stroll get penalty points from moving over on Gaslight? Yeah, you got two, I think. And no contact was made. Both drivers carried on. And that was a tank second time penalty with no contact properly made. Gassie had to go on to the grass a little bit, right?

How was this only fine? I don't want to shout out too much, but this feels favourable. It feels like because landing or else was out of the race, they went, or we should be seen to do something here because it will be bad if we did nothing. What's the lowest we can give in five seconds? There you go,

we've done something. We've punished him for being silly. That's what this feels like. It feels like they have not taking into account the consistencies of previous events, how damaging this could be, and actually how light you could get away with an instant like this. And now, now there's precedent.

If you're another team, you can go back and you can use this example. You could do it as much as you want. So if you have a driver, again, this is a really awful scenario. If you've got a driver in third, who's wants to win the title, but the driver in second is part of your team, and they're right up against the title rivaling first, and neither of those having impact on the championship,

why would driver B not crash into the back of driver A and go, oh, I mucked up by breaking, took him out. Oh, no. Norris only got a five second, though. So I'll have a five second, please. You know, we're fine. You could get away with stuff like that now, because there's no, there's no punishment, proper punishment for something like this. It's, I do feel like this has been favoured towards Norris.

I'm sorry Norris fans. Just go, you know, to dig on Landon himself. He's got no saying this. But this does feel pretty unfair when it comes to other events. Yeah. I genuinely think that if it was any two teammates in that same situation, they would have gone with the decision that they did. And I think it was less about who it was and what the team is and more about

there wasn't a rival team to go against. There was never going to be a fight. McClaren obviously would have, if McLaren had to say, he'd have walked away with absolutely nothing. And it's not like Piastri side of the garage would have been advocating for it to be double the time penalty that it was or anything like that. It's just, again, you've got to debate these things

based on the merits of the incident. And that has not happened. You cannot convince me that has happened. Let's take our first break on this episode, on the other side, bit on Freddie Vass. Jungle is Vassive. Welcome back, everyone. Ferrari team principal Fred Vassur has hit out at the Italian press following speculation about his future, calling it disrespectful and damaging to the team. Reports from Gazeta Dello Sports and Corriera della apologies, all Italians, questioned Vassar's position and the influence of new recruit

Leicera. Veser frustrated by repeated rumors said journalists should remember their dealing with people and not things. Charles Leclair and Lewis Hamilton backed for Sir strongly ahead of the Canadian GP. Lewis Hamilton said, I want Fred here. I do believe Fred is the person to take us to the top. And Lecler said, we have a vision that we share here, Fred, Lewis and myself. This is our plan and we should stick to it. First question on this one, Sam.

Is he right to fight back? I don't mind. I don't mind the fight back. and I think the press would take it really negatively if you said nothing. I think you're a damned if you do, damned if you don't get kind of position when the press come for you like this,

when you get attacked in the papers. He is in maybe the most high pressure job in Formula One, team principal of Ferrari. I think it really is, bears so much weight. You carry so much on your shoulders. And the longer it goes until Ferrari wings something, the more that pressure grows.

And every team principal that comes in, you will get a shorter and shorter fuse to make a difference before the Tophosi, Italy, Ferrari fans around the world go, we're fed up of this, who's next? Get the next person in. And you look at the most successful team principles at the moment and they have longevity, they have consistency. And they've been allowed time, both through success and through failure. Christian Horner, for example, didn't start off all rows is right. He didn't win for a few years, one four in a row. No championship again for another, what, eight years at that point, I think it was.

So yeah, yeah, look what, you brought it back another three times, right? He got the staff and four titles as well. So that's pretty successful to turn it around. Toto Wolfe, when he came in, wasn't immediately brilliant, of course. He picked it up as they were starting to build, delivering some titles, and then New Era comes along. They barely won a race per season. A couple of races are season at most.

And yet, so you stick with him. You're saying, oh, he's got some ownership in there, whatever. But you get the point. The point is that he hasn't been voted out. and that longevity provides success. And Andrea Stella's the next one, really. Stella came in at a tricky time for McLaren, and they weren't immediately successful.

And with him and Zach Brown as a partnership, they've grown to be successful. And they really are building a fantastic force there. You can't keep churning out team principles. With Frederick Vassar is a brilliant, brilliant mind. He's a great member of the Formula One community. He knows how to be a leader. He gets along so well with those drivers.

And I think that Freddie Bass knows where the rot lies in Ferrari. I think he's aware of what's causing them to be slower than they need to be. They have the driver line up. They've got some brilliant team personnel. They simply can't build a car that manages the engine power that they have. The engine's good. It's the arrow, right? That chassis is unbalanced.

It's got some drag on it. And they are struggling. And I think he's fully aware of who and what is causing those issues. And that's his game, right? That's a playing genius. Guys used to build chassis for, what was it, Formula 2? He used to build up and you to create the chassis for. He's got that history in him, which is so incredible.

He knows what he's talking about when it comes to this stuff. So I think he was right to talk back. I think he would have been lambastic for not talking back. And I'm really glad that Lewis and Charles stuck up for him because it's tricky. Unfortunately, the only way he will ever shut them up is by winning. So he can say whatever he wants. And he can deal with that however he wants. But the way to get back at them is to win.

And so he's going to hope as much as anyone that he is winning sooner rather than. and like that. I love the response. I think it was absolutely what was what was needed from Fred Fassar because the Italian media can, you called it the highest pressure job in the world, and I absolutely agree. It is not easy for the Ferrari team principle. And really, this response was an opportunity to almost do something about what he's being accused of because a lot of the accusations have come around, not necessarily team morale, but cohesion within the team. You know, Versaurs' lack of Italian fluency was mentioned in one of the reports and maybe Bonotto and some lingering, I don't know, loyalty to him is kind of mentioned as well.

This was almost an opportunity, a bit of a test for him to get it right and stand up for the team and make sure that his people were protected. And that's what he's done. Verser himself is not going to buckle under the pressure, I don't think. And he said during his response that it's not about me in this. It's about my people. As mentioned, like Loix-Sera and his position in the team and his contribution or lack of contribution as he's been accused of,

he's standing up for those sorts of people. And he referenced another time that it had happened a couple of years ago where someone else had sort of been named. And for him to come forward and say, you know, these are people, they're not things. You can't just use your words however you want to and expect no consequences. And he stood up for them as sort of their leader. And I thought that was absolutely the correct response. And the people back at the factory, who I think he said he'll talk to on. Monday about this should feel quite buoyed, but they have someone like Fred Fusser going out to

bat for them. In terms of the Italian media, Sam, how much influence does it have on the scuderia? I think they could be quite potent. I think they could be quite divisive when it comes to how the general public, the normal Ferrari fan, F1 fan views, they're brilliant to foe. Now, this might sound harsh. A smart person will be able to look at the facts themselves. They'll be able to look at what's been going on over Friday the last couple of years, the changes in what's going on, the fact that we've got new regulations coming up. The fact that at the end of 2024, Ferrari were arguably the best car at many races that we went to of the last eight or nine Grand Prix. There's some really positive signs in there from Freddie Bass and his team. And

You can't remember he's only been in this team now for what, just over 18 months coming up to two years now. And so team principal terms, that's not a long time. That's got a long time to affect change either. So I do think that if you're smarting up about it and you're willing to have some critical thinking, you can work it out. But if you're not, if you're maybe a casual fan,

if you're just a Ferrari fan that likes to follow along for race day and then you join in with a bit of, you know, chickshout on social media or whatever, you could very easily be persuaded that, you know, there's some negativity there, there's some poor stories going on, he's not performing the way you expected. And that can turn a lot of minds. And then word of mouth gets about and people start to go, oh yeah, but he hasn't done X, he hasn't done Y.

And that starts to build. It's a snowball. It has a snowball effect. And that adds to that pressure that Ferrari are applying, or the Italian media rather, are applying to Ferrari. So I think they can be potent, much like the British media. They're called the Pact. they're called the pack, the British media,

because they will chase you down in like dogs, in a pack to get what they need out of it. And I don't think the Italian media are too different when it comes to this kind of story, especially when it comes to their beloved Ferrari. So, yeah, I think they can be powerful. And I think he's handled it the right way so far, but hopefully going to these new regulations,

because I don't think he'll go anywhere before that. We see some results for Ferrari because I love, frankly Vast to be successful at Ferrari. I like him a lot, and I would like it to go his way. I think the Italian media when it comes to Ferrari is just a different beast entirely from anything else within the sport, even the British media. I think it's next level. And whilst we can talk about it from like a spectator's perspective, like outside looking in, I think it's maybe one of those that you don't fully appreciate or acknowledge unless you are in the moment.

I think only the likes of Fred Visser or anyone else who sort of live that life can properly talk about the influence that it has. I know it's not from a team boss's perspective, but we've heard multiple times from Lewis Hamilton this year who has, he's vastly experienced in the sport. He's been at two very successful organizations in McLaren and Mercedes. He's not seen absolutely everything, but he's seen a lot of it. But there have been a lot of times this year where Lewis Hamilton is like, oh, my God, I didn't realize how this was until I got to be in this team. I've watched this team. I've competed against this team. But until I got there and I'm a part of it, I don't appreciate exactly the challenge, the uniqueness of the situation that he's in. I think it's the same situation for the

team boss. I do think the media is strong enough that it will affect sort of the public pressure that figures like Fred Fassar can get, the internal politics of Ferrari as well, and corporate influence. Like if you think of even the seniors, like the higher ups at Ferrari, Ferrari is a national institution and it relies so much on heritage, prestige, popularity within the country, that if there's anything set to damage that, they will consider action. So, yes, I think the media is incredibly powerful. You said it earlier on in this segment.

It doesn't matter who you are as a team principal or as a driver. If you're not getting it done, you will be treated the same way. Like, results are king. And that will be the only way you can shut up the media. It doesn't matter what you've done before. It doesn't matter what you've done after. It doesn't matter what your list of achievements are going into any. of those roles, you don't perform a Ferrari, you'll be viewed the same way.

And dare I say, if the car does start to win, and let's say only one of those drivers wings, if Lewis Hamilton starts walking back to bat races, the media will go for Charlotte Clare. And if Charlotte Clare starts winning regular races, the media will go for a seven-time world champion in Lewis Hamilton. They will not give their graces to anyone just because it's a game. They will happily go, you ain't good enough for our Ferrari, I think. And they won't rest until they've got the very best.

I do think Fred Vassur's tenure so far has been a bit of a mixed bag, but probably a bit more positive than negative. And as you've already said, in terms of like timing of making a move, Fred Vassar's kind of rubbish these reports. And it would be a really weird time to make any sort of a switch with the new regulations coming in next year. You'd be, have been working a couple of years for this plan of 26 to then like give up on it almost at the last hurdle, that would be insane.

And Fred Fassert, even though the performance of this car has been a letdown, certainly this year, it feels like they went the wrong way with the car a bit, whereas the likes of McLaren have extended their advantage compared to last year. Mercedes have caught back up to Ferrari after Ferrari had made a jump last year versus their rivals. But I still think overall Fred Fassar has done a really good job operationally to get this team in a better position to win if and when that car is a bit better. In terms of pit stops, how many times in the Bonotto days did we comment on a botched double pit stop or a really slow stop that cost them a position in a race, like a four second stop? And I know the strategy isn't 100% okay. Like we saw the Canadian GP, it isn't.

but I think it's in a far better spot than it was. We don't, we don't see these Ferrari blunders with anywhere near the amount of consistency that we had in the past. No, we don't. No, we don't. But we do still see them more than many other teams, especially at the front end of this grid. I think Freddie Vass over has been positive. I would put him at maybe 65% positive, 35% negative.

And when I say negative, I mean that the car just isn't there. And that's actually, I mean the car isn't there. he isn't responsible for literally making the car. So there's only so much you could put on him in that sense. It hasn't seen the progress that we've wanted. They really entered the season, as I've already mentioned in 24. And then they made that call to alter how the suspension worked for them. They went from, I think it was pushrod to pull rod and their suspension.

And that was really new for Ferrari. They felt they maximise their development cycle and they had to try something new. And I think that might be partially why they're struggling with balance and struggling over curbs and why they haven't got the ability to throw the car in, both drivers would want it. I do think that's cost them that change. I'm hoping the way it comes for these new regulations, they will make the right call because I do think they've gone the wrong way. But I do think efficiency-wise, they are better. I do think they have a clear focus. I do think overall, especially last year, Freddie Vass was quite harsh on those who were struggling. And we saw

some changes up and down the Ferrari line up internally of how they set out. And he made the big call to bring in Lewis Hamilton, which saw Ferrari stock right. monstrously high. I think it tripled or something when that announcement went live, which is incredible for business. There's a lot of good foundations being built. Foundations take time and the rest of the house

has to still be built, but he's laying down the brickwork and I think it's going generally in the right way. They just need to let this year go and make sure they actually do smash 2026 because otherwise, I think he may end up being in more trouble than I'd like him to be. And with that,

we will head to our second break on this episode. On the other side, oh my good, there's more stewarding chat. Oh, we go again. We go again. Welcome back, everyone. Some more stewarding chat for you, because this came out before the Canadian GP weekend. Derek Warwick, son of the illustrious Warwick, was...

That's not real. I can't believe you tried to freak that in there. He was suspended from his stewarding duties at the Canadian GP following controversial media comments. The suspension followed quotes attributed to Warwick shared by a gambling firm, which criticised several current drivers including Lando Norris, Landstrol and Yuki Sonoda. The FIA confirmed the decision stating that Warwick acknowledged the comments were inappropriate and had apologised. He is expected to return for the Austrian GP. And if you're thinking that sounds very familiar, well, it is because Johnny Herbert was in a very similar spot.

He gave quotes to gambling companies. Now, the outcome of that was a little bit different and we'll get into maybe some of the similarities and differences between those two situations and a little bit. Before we get there, though, Sam, should they be allowed to do this? Should they be allowed to talk to the media at any point at races where they are particularly the Stewart? where's the line or where should the line be? Yes, I think they should be allowed to talk to the media, but I do think it should be about incredibly finite topics. I think they should be allowed to essentially reiterate

or break down the reasoning behind decisions being given. So if someone were to say, why did you only give Landon Norris a five-second time penalty for driving in the back of Oscar Piascri? It looks like you said there was no sporting damage down there. And for them to then go, well, actually, we had this conversation, and X and Y was decided, and that's why we came to this conclusion.

I don't mind that kind of conversation. Also, I think they should be allowed to talk about the breakdown of the rule set. So if someone were to ask, what does X rule mean? Or how should X rule be applied? Or what are you basing X on? They can give a justification. I think that's fair. I think anything that comes across as opinion-based or is about a single driver,

stay away from it. You would not have a Premier League referee talking about how poor Nicholas Jackson's done at Chelsea and why they're bringing in Dallat from the switch. Unless it's Shergan Klopp, who isn't a referee, so it's okay. You know, you wouldn't have a referee in basketball talking about certain trades. Harry E. does that for us and why one is better than the other.

It doesn't happen. It doesn't happen because it shows a bias. It shows a bias that fans can get behind. It can also affect, and I hate that we're saying this, it can affect betting. And betting around the world is a huge industry. It drives billions of dollars. And when you've got an official sports person

who is essentially in charge of enforcing the rules, telling you subjectual matters, it can alter the way that sits. And that's really damaging as well for a lot of people. It would be like a police officer talking to you about a potential criminal. That's kind of what's going on there. You go, not proven guilty, but if I talk to you about it in the press, it may or may not sway your judgment

because the police officer is telling me why. that's the kind of situation you don't refine yourself in as any official in any government, sport, political, whatever, you don't want to be having those conversations. So unless he is essentially reiterating a rule set or digesting why a rule was made or a decision was given, I do not think that they should be speaking to the media at all, especially to betting companies, where companies wing and lose and people wing and lose, sometimes purely based on opinion. I think this is really naive. I think it's even worse that Johnny Herbert was essentially done for the same thing last year.

And he's falling into the same trap. I think it's really, really silly of him. Yeah, I think generic media work can be okay. But there are a couple of conditions to that that absolutely weren't met here. Firstly, to your point, it needs to be selective as to who it is. It can't be gambling companies. Like, come on. It sounds so stupid to say because it's just so obvious, but apparently it needs to be said.

Twice in a year. Yeah, not even six months, I don't think. So no, yeah, no to gambling companies. And secondly, I really don't think they should talk to the media on the same weekend that they are a steward. I appreciate they're like, they're part time and they're volunteers as well, I guess. So I don't mind if you want to talk to the media in off weeks, but on the weekend that you're supposed to be this impartial, unbiased steward, it's very dangerous to talk to the media. Apart from the instance where you said, I would have, and I've said this before, I would have

some sort of communication from the FIA after a race weekend to run through their decisions. But that would be a more controlled environment, I think. It wouldn't be like a media Q&A. I think that would just be a bit of a press conference, right? No questions asked. Like just a quick explainer more than anything. But certainly not giving opinions on who is underrated, who is overrated, who's done this and done that. That can't be allowed.

Transparency can coexist if there are clear guidelines. But it just doesn't feel like we've either got those at the moment or they're being followed. As mentioned, a one race suspension, which was the Canadian GP. Is that fair? It's a tricky one because I think Johnny Herbert was already on his way out when he was kind of going through this punishment cycle. He was the first to go through it. So I imagine that they were a little bit more unsure of what they were meant to do

when this kind of situation arose. So I think he probably came to an agreement that actually, as it was coming right to the end of the season anyway, he would step away from the sport now and just kind of move away. There you go, it's done. The punishment isn't acting effectively. Johnny Herbert gets to walk away.

One race punishment, I don't know. I don't know. This feels a little bit light. I mean, the FIA can start running out of people to employ if they start to get rid of everyone endlessly. But this still feels like you could take a grievance or a bias into a race as a fan and go, well, he only said this two weeks ago.

And now I think this has happened with the drive. and if they're remotely unhappy with what's happened with the outcome, they almost have grounds for complaint at that point. If he says Landon Norris is overrated, you know, I think he's really not very good, gets too much praise. And then there's a crash that involves Landon Norris, and Landon Norris gets giving a penalty when it's maybe a rating instance.

You can immediately go, he doesn't like him. I don't think he likes him. Even if it's the right decision. Even if it's the right decision, you're right. You can sit there and be like, he doesn't like him anyway. So what he causes done that? And that puts the sport in doubt

that allows the sport to be taking into a negative space and treated liking opinion rather than laying down the law, abiding by a set of rules and governing using that information only. And that's why I mentioned earlier. Referees have favourite teams. I think there's almost an unwritten rule that you can't referee against the team you support. For that reason, because you're biased.

You want your team to win. And if you were the Ferrari fan, you most likely will end up wanting to favor Ferrari, even if it's subconsciously. You might look at things a little differently. So I kind of think that it should be done. I think unfortunately, kind of should be turned away. I don't really think you should be allowed to do this. I think it's quite damaging for the sport that this happened twice in six months now. Yeah, I thought this was really light.

Just one race. I appreciate it to first offence. and I appreciate he apologised basically straight away. And I also appreciate it is difficult to be overly, it's difficult to punish volunteers that much. It's not like they can turn around and go, right, you're not getting paid for the next three months. It's like, okay, that matches the amount you're going to pay me anyway.

So I appreciate all that. But does this really dissuade any other stewards not to do this? Like, if you're one of the other stewards and you've just seen this go down and you haven't had any violations to this point, there's been no instances where you've done similar, why would you not go, hmm, if I just get a bit of money from giving some quotes to this bedtick company, I then get a one race span in a 24 race calendar, that kind of feels worth it. 10 grand for a holiday. Why wouldn't you? If you're Enrique Begoldi, who was here on digital stewardship, right? It was in Switzerland, I think. You go, I can't really be bothered to do whatever way.

It might be later on in the year. I quite like doing it digitally. I don't want to go to Vegas. Yeah, I'll give to besting advice. Cheers. I'll see you next week instead. Why not? It's got to be a turn, and I just don't think it is.

But this also opens up why we don't pay our skewery. and we should have contracts with stewards where they are paid and it is, because at least they've got some connection to it, that means something to them, that they go, oh, I could damage that. And that to me, it just feels silly that we don't.

Yeah, there's a lot of things that are sort of part of this conversation that I think we should do and could do. And we're working within the framework that the FIA has at the moment, but that framework would be bombed and restarted again if it was up to me. The comparison with Herbert, I think, is difficult because, as you say, I think he was heading out anyway. We never got full visibility on what the decision-making process was there, but it felt to me like maybe with Johnny Herbert, it was, if you keep doing that, you can't be a steward. And Johnny Herbert went, all right, then less part ways. I want to keep doing that.

Whereas I think with this Derek Warrick one, it might be, I won't do it again. Therefore, there's a while. We don't actually know what the punishment for Herbert would have been if he'd stayed. It's not like he was fired. At least we don't think he was fired for the actions. It was more of a mutual agreement. So I think he was walking away anyway. Yeah, I think he was.

I think he was done at the end of that season. He had a lot of flack from the staffing fangs, whether you agree with that or not. I think he was a bit like tired. I think he was a bit bored of hearing that. So I think he was leaving. And this was just cool. I'll take an extra 10K in the back pocket and I'd go a race early. See you later.

I think regardless of where you arrive on this issue, what we desperately need is just better, clearer guidelines from the FIA. Just say what you can do and can't do as a steward. Then there doesn't have to be any guesswork every time something like this happens. Or it doesn't happen at all because the guidelines are good enough that the stewards don't risk anything. So, yeah, a bit silly. Should we do an F1 fantasy update?

Oh gosh, I haven't even looked at this. I don't think I want to now. Oh, well, yes. Because we're recording early in the week, I had to find the results myself. Manual labour ben. Manual labour ben. That's what they call me MLB.

Moving up. Drive to spin. Congratulations to you. You have won this week, the Canadian GP. 297 points. Drive to spin. Well done. Top three in the league.

So there's been a little bit of change here. We've now got a tie at the top. So warning door Hajjar is still at the top, but joined by, oh my God, Ben, what have I written there? Breakdown under racing. Sorry, that's really bad handwriting. He's left the door, Ajar, for a new race leader. Yes, so they are tied at the top with Clueless F1 guy in third, 57 points back. So very interesting at the top.

But how are the four of us doing? I had a bit of a nothing week. I thought the Liam Lawson DNF might cost me a bit more than it did, but I've actually gone up a little bit, up nine spots to 77th, my inner Valtry Bottas. If you finish 77th, you can pat yourself on the back. That's a really solid result. Do you know what I really want to do, though?

I'd love to, if I could win the late breaking league, that would be incredible. Sure. You can retire. I really want to win the public league that you have to join at the beginning of, because I'm in the Esteban-Ockon League, of course. And I'm 55th in that, so I want to win that league. Can you only be in positions that relate to driver numbers?

Apparently, yeah. Okay, sure. That makes sense. So, yeah, I'm 77th. Kirstie has had the best week of all of us yet again. Flying high, flying high. Continuing to fly high, she's gone up 73 spots, and now sits inside the top 1,97.

She was last week one. Yeah. That was amazing. Great job, Kodog. The comeback has been inspirational. Harry Ead is third. So as he was last week, but not a great week for our Harry. Down 143 spots to 1,559th overall.

It worries me that I'm still behind him after a week that bad. Yeah. You scored more points than he did this week. You have still gone down, but not by as many as Harry. Down 23 spots. 1,757. How do I do so badly? Did you have V-Cab? No. I have Williams. That was it. Yeah. Your second team, I knew. Oh, yeah. I had Gasly Sykes and Hajjar were my three drivers outside of a lot. long so in Inoskapiastri. Yeah. Tough week for me. Albin, DNF, whatever, you were a bit there, mate.

Well, it's fun being at the back of the bus. I mean, to be fair, you've got over 1,000 people behind you in the league. As a team, we're all right. Yeah, we've got like not far off 3,000 people in this league now. So we are eclipsing our overall numbers that we had last year by a long way. So thank you to everyone who's joined. And of course, if you haven't joined yet, you're still. can. There's opportunity to, unless you're doing really well, in which case, go away.

Go away. I don't want to be further down. Let's take our final break on this episode, on the other side. We've got Shao LaCla's top three wins in F1. Love this. I like this little segment. Yeah. Welcome back, everyone. Quick Patreon plug here, because, you know, we've already had one of those, and you need another one. We did our top three Oscar Piastri wins on a recent Patreon episode. So we thought we'd continue with that series here. And today we're going to look at Charles LeCler's top three wins ranked in F-1 so far. And I say so far, because surely he'll win another one. But equally, it's Charles LeClaire, knowing his luck, he might be done and dusted at eight. Also, how has he only got eight? But one million pole positions.

Exactly. So we've actually, unbelievably, only got one more for Charles LeClaire to review than what we did for Oscar. Oh, Piastri's got more race wings of LeCler at the end of the year. Yeah, yeah. He will have more. Oh, gosh. I'm sorry, Charles.

Yeah. But we have got eight to choose from here. So it'd be interesting to see if we have the same list, some differences. I'll be honest. I found this one more difficult than the Piastri one. I agree. Piaxri's really built into his career. It feels like LeCleur had some bangers early on.

Actually, every race that you look at, I kind of went, that was pretty good, actually. Yeah, it was. It was really tough. I don't know what is worse. I mean, I appreciate there aren't many worst race wins, but I thought that all of them, I was going through them all like,

that's pretty good, that's pretty good. Yeah, that's pretty good as well. And then realize I needed only three for this segment. Kick us off. What have you got third? I've got his win at his home Grand Prix, third, Monaco last season. It was a brilliant race wing for Charlotte Clare.

And I'm really pleased he's got that home wing. He handled the Grand Prix, really, really well. Qualifying was sensational, really, really brilliant lap to get him wearing E to be. But William Monaco is a little bit different to what William Monaco used to be. It's, you know, the cars are big enough that realistically, you get your pit stop, right?

You can kind of just sit there. You can kind of do whatever you want. Of course, because we need to do one. And he's about to say that. He didn't even need to do one. Because we had the red flag so early, he just got to put on new ties and running out. It doesn't make it easy. It's still really really difficult to get the job done. So much pressure, so much home. pressure, of course, it was such a romantic victory for him. I do still think it was mighty impressive, but it's a comfortable third for me. Great news. We won't have the same list because

not only have I not got that one in third, it doesn't make my top three. And for the reason you kind of gave at the end, I was like, it was a really impressive win. And at the same time, I'm like, he didn't have to do a pit stop. It is Monaco. There are a few others here that I might just put ahead of it, including what's third place for me, the 2022 Austrian GP. Great race. So he qualified second in this one, just behind one Max Verstappen. And Lecler kept up the pressure on Vastappen from the off and got an overtake done on lap 12 of the race.

So overtaking Max Vastappen by itself is a pretty good achievement. He gets the overtake done. And Vastappen, pretty similar, I guess, to a few. other races this year with Spain comes to mind. But like Vestappen basically came into the pits as soon as he was overtaken, trying to almost prolong the, the damage to an extent. So he, his tires were melting. His tires were melted. He decides to come in and Charleclair is able to do 14 more laps on that stint. And then after Lecler stops, Vestappen's obviously got the undercut. He has to overtake Vestappen again and does it. And then we almost go through the

same thing again, where Lecler comes into the pits 12 laps after Vestappen the second time around, and he overtakes Vestappen for a third time in this race. It could have been, at that point, quite a large win margin, because it got the overtake done, still had quite a few laps to go with better tyres, but two things kind of put a stop to that. Firstly, there was a VSC, which meant both he and Vestappen could stop for fresh tires. That helped Vestappen more than it did Lecler. and then secondly, he's having to deal with a throttle issue for the rest of this race. And he's able to manage it to the point where he still claims the win.

But I think Bonotto himself revealed after the race that he was very nervy with how that car was performing at the end of the race. So the fact that he did a great job first half of the race on tyreware, great job second half of the race on managing that issue. That gets it a place on my list. What is second for you? I've gone from Monza last year. I think this is better than his first Monsa wing. That isn't on my list. I'll reveal that one to you early.

It's just something about the engine. I can't quite place my finger on it, but something like the engine. It's not on my list either, that first Italian win. I found it very difficult because I think it was such an impression. It was a 2V1 scenario that he overcome. It was.

Also. He still drove brilliantly. Yes, he did. But when your engine is a rocket ship, it's quite hard to give you full props. So this Monza makes it onto my list. And I think the reason behind this

was his strategy and his ability to keep the tyres alive. And no one saw it coming. I think the entire race, we were like, well, this is kind of between the McLaren's and the staff and a bit of the outsider here. You could get the job done.

And then all of a sudden, the pit stop phase happens. And Lecler is somehow like 10 seconds clear. Everyone, it's just down the road. And he just holds on. And I have a sudden. I think it shows just how brilliant race management, Charlerclair has become, that he was able to fend off cars I do think were much faster at the time. But the strategy was just so brilliant.

And he made it work. It was him that made that work. It was him that brought home that wing because you could be giving a good strategy. But having a good strategy is one thing. And deploying it, making it work is another. And I think Lecler was just absolutely sensational around there. So, Munger 24 takes second on my list. second on my list and meaning we will have completely different lists is the 2022

I'm staying in 2022 but going a bit earlier in the year the Australian GP so excellent quality he's nearly three temps clear of three tenth clear in second he is I think one second clear of the Mercedes drivers who I appreciate having a bit of a down year but equally that's that's impressive he starts really well builds a gap then there's a safety car. Safety car comes in. He rebuilds that gap. Then there's another safety car. Safety car comes in, holds position again versus Vastappen, rebuilds the lead again. Vestappen retires from the race. The VSC comes out. VSC ends. He extends the advantage again. And he wins this race by 20.5 seconds despite two safety cars and that VSC. He has the fastest lap of the race, which is able to do on the

last lap of the Grand Prix, always a sign that he's got more. pace in hand. And to this point, it's his only career Grand Slam, which of course is fastest lap, lead every single lap of the race, pole position, win the Grand Prix. And I, this, this is a really painful sentence. So just bear with me. The win meant Lecler extended his championship lead to 34 points in that he had the championship lead before this. And he extended it. And for the And Ferrari then had a 39 point advantage at the top. We thought that was the year. And it was not.

What's number one for you? That race. Exactly that race. I think he probably could have won that race by a minute. Even with Max Verstappen in that Grand Prix, I just think he was on a different level during that race. The two safety cars bringing them back. He was gone.

He was gone. He was so mighty. He's only Grand Slam. Obviously, it helped that Vastappan retired, but he had it in hand regardless. He had that easily won. He was dunking all over Max Verstappen. The second faster than Mesaigas, as you said, was amazing in qualifying. But he was also a second faster than Norris.

And, you know, Norris was really up and comer at this point. The McLean was starting to look really, really good, starting to look faster. The only person within half a second of him was Vastappan, which is amazing because that's Max Vastappen. He just had everything in hand this Grand Prix. And I think overall it's his most complete race weekend. It is the one race weekend that makes me think that was Vettel-esque, that was Hamilton-esque, it was Vestappan-esque, LeCler had it all.

As you mentioned, he extended his championship lead and went on to achieve nothing from that whole season. So, yeah, good job, Ferrari, well done, LeClau. Yeah, cheers Ferrari. We've switched second and first. I've gone the Italian GP last year. As you kind of mentioned, qualified fourth, got up to second quite early on in the race.

Stopped really early to go onto the hard tires, the decision that LeCler at the time didn't agree with. Piastri and Norris pit around the same time, but are very much on a two-stop strategy, whereas the Claire sticks with the one. And the way in which he managed that Grand Prix, the tire wear was incredibly impressive. I just, every time I think of this race,

I just point to Carlos Sines, who was on a very similar strategy. The only difference was Sines had four-lap fresher tires to work with. Signs was overtaken by both McLarence and was 15 seconds back of LeClerc at the flag. LeCler was able to hold off both of those McLaren's on what was probably should have been McLaren's day and took an unlikely win. So, yeah, there's a reason it was second for you as a reason it's first for me.

It was a wonderful drive. Yeah, really, really brilliant. Those two especially were, I think we were clear of everything else for me, those two. They were. Honourable mention, I wanted to find a way to get 22 Bahrain in here as well. He was really good at 22 Bahrain. That DRS battle with Vastappen. He managed him.

Yeah, that was brilliant. Absolutely fantastic wheel to wheel racing. And I think he deserved to win that, even though, of course, we had the retirement, of course, from the Stappen as well, which extended, well, gave him the championship lead. But he was great at the start of that 22 season. Okay. Let us know, by the way, what your top three is. there are a couple of other races as well that we haven't mentioned at all. So let's know if there are any similarities.

Maybe you've got a completely different list to us. But we will go on too. Even though we are recording early, we fought ahead this timeout. And we are going to move on to, after a couple of week absence, the greatest segment in all of podcasting. It is the LB question of the week. substitute teacher week. How are you saying it somewhere in a car, I'm sure?

Yes, question of the week. Unfortunately, Toto Wolf decided to give Kimmy Antonelli a new nickname after the Canadian GP. I can't even repeat it. I hate it. Grande and grande Kimi. Yeah, it's not good. And we've decided that it's not good enough to the. the point that we need to come up with something different or ask you to come up with something

different. So that was our question of the week and there are some answers, Sam. This is a great Paul. We've got a lot of very, very funny answers to this question. So thank you to everyone that gets involved. If you want to get involved next time, follow us on social media, late breaking F1. I've got loads of favourites. I'm going to just go chronologically as I see them here. The first one comes from Kev on Instagram, which is baby ice man, ice man, ice baby ice baby. Ice Baby. It's my getting six. At all.

Well, I love it. I guess it's related vaguely to Kimmy Riking who shares a game. That is it. Baby. Ice. Why? Kimmy. The first one from me comes from Alex.

And of course, we're only getting these answers in written form. And sometimes we just have to assume that they are said a particular way. And I have to assume that this answer is to the tune of Gimme Moore from Britney Spears, which is, Kim me more, Kimmy more, Kimmy, give me more. It's a banger as well. You know what? Fair play. Absolute banger, Brittany. Good job.

To be clear, it wasn't Brittany who answered. But yes, well-don, Brittany. I wish it was Britney that answered. Pinkus Rob came in with Kimmy Chury, which I've got a lot of time for. Next one from me is from Brandt, who went with Kim Possible. Kim Possible. A bit of a feedback. Did you know that he had that ferret, didn't he, that he always carried around?

I've got no idea. In show, cartoon boyfriend, like a ferret that he's going around all the time. I like this one from Aaron, which is Kimmy Totolini. Yeah, going full past that. Full pastor. Full past. A bit of a confusing one here from Mike. He's just said, AKA, but that's what we're asking.

What should he be known as? Also known as what? Let's go. Yeah. aka you've missed the next bit. Can you get it right, please? This one, I can't believe it. I got the Brickley reference from Websmith Noah.

Oops, I hear me the gang. I'm not having that. I'm not close. No. That's a three-week ban. You're not allowed to answer question of the week until we're in July. Others. Next one from me is from Matt.

going along the, it's so bad. And he knows it's bad because he's put a question mark at the end of it. Kimmy Rykitten? No. If you have to put a question mark at the end, you know it's not great. Michael came up with Spaghetti Lunch Boy. Yeah, of course. Next evolution of Spaghetti Dinner lady.

Yep. Nick said Sam Sage Jr. No. No. No. Can you name your first kid Sam'say Jr? No, no, no. The world will one explode if I have a child

and two, I'm not old enough to be that boy's dad, so no. But also, please. Also maybe. Last one from me is from Drew, who just said, Gary. Can I just say quickly with Kimmy Antonelli and the nickname Gary? I don't think I've ever seen anyone in my life who looks less like a Gary.

than Kimmy Antonelli. Yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah. You know where you go, if I wasn't called X, what would I be called? The last name on the list is so far down the list. Yeah, it really is.

I think that's it. There's so many good ones there. Good job this week on Question of the Week. Well done, Tim. Yes, I think from next week as well, we'll be back on a bit more, a bit of a more normal recording schedule. So Question of the Week will be back with a bit more frequency.

and from this weekend as well, Mr. Harry Ead will be back with us. He's been very busy this last week. He's been in Le Mon. He's been Le Monging. Le Monging. But he'll be back. We'll be back as one big happy family.

Sam, if you wouldn't mind, until Sunday, getting us out of here. Yes, we'll be back Sunday for more F1 chik chat. The F1 movie's coming out soon. Let's know if you fancy a chat on that or a segment or anything like that. It's not F1, but it is F1, if you know what I'm saying. So, you know, let us know your thoughts.

I'll be curious to hear them. Thanks for listening, folks. Thanks for joining us, especially on a non-race week. And we love the support that we're getting this year. The podcast is bigger than it's ever being. So thank you to everyone that is turning up and showing their love to the show. Remember, get your tickets for the live show. Patreon is on sale now.

So join the Patreon if you want a ticket. Or if you're already there, get yourself on. We can't wait to see you asking. We will see you on Sunday. In the meantime, I've been Samuel Sage. And I've been Ben Hocking. And remember, keep. Breaking late.

This podcast is part of the Sports Social Podcast Network.