0
Johnny Herbert has rejected Lewis Hamilton's assertion that his pitlane speeding penalty in Hungary was simply bad luck, arguing the seven-time world champion must take responsibility for what the former FIA steward described as a clear misjudgement. Hamilton exceeded the pitlane speed limit by a marginal amount during the Hungarian Grand Prix, triggering an automatic penalty that compounded a difficult first half of the season punctuated by multiple time penalties. For a driver moving to Ferrari in 2025, the disciplinary pattern raises questions about focus and execution.
Hamilton's infringement was minimal, but Herbert, who served as an FIA steward and competed in Formula 1 for over a decade, insisted the margin is irrelevant under the sport's regulations. Speaking to a betting platform, Herbert dismissed Hamilton's post-race comments outright. "You can't say it was simply bad luck," he said. "You can't and shouldn't give a driver a penalty because you don't like him. That's not how it works."
Herbert framed the incident within the broader relationship between drivers and race control, a dynamic that has grown increasingly collaborative in recent years. The guidelines applied by stewards are developed in consultation with the drivers themselves, creating a framework that reflects how the grid wants incidents adjudicated. Hamilton's suggestion that chance played a role undermines that structure, according to Herbert.
Consistency over sentiment
Herbert defended the stewarding process in Hungary as textbook application of established rules. "The guidelines are there. Four stewards sit together and work closely. You can't ignore rules and guidelines because that leads to all kinds of problems," he said. "Consistency in handing out penalties is crucial, and that's what the teams and drivers are also striving for. I think the stewards do that excellently."
The distinction Herbert drew was not about severity but about principle. A speed limit breach of half a kilometre per hour carries the same regulatory weight as a larger overshoot because the threshold exists to eliminate ambiguity. Drivers know the limit; pit equipment displays real-time speed data. Herbert argued that softening the application based on marginal breaches would erode trust across the grid and invite inconsistency, the very complaint drivers lodge most frequently against race control.
A pattern Hamilton must address
Herbert questioned whether the Hamilton of a decade ago would have made such an error, suggesting the mistake reflects a lapse rather than systemic bias. "The speeding offence was Lewis' fault, full stop," Herbert said. "You can't blame someone else. Why he made such a wrong assessment, I don't know. Ultimately, there are no excuses. It's not that the stewards have something against him. That's not how it works. He simply has to unlearn this."
The comment points to a broader narrative around Hamilton's 2024 campaign. While Mercedes has shown improved pace in the second quarter of the season, Hamilton has accumulated penalties that have cost him positions and points. For a driver preparing to lead Ferrari's championship ambitions, the margin for such errors will narrow further. Herbert's intervention, blunt as it was, underscores a reality Hamilton will face in Maranello: at the sharp end, fractions matter, and responsibility sits squarely with the driver. Stewards apply the rules; it is the competitor's job to stay within them.
Azerbaijan Grand Prix
I. Hadjar
A. Antonelli
C. Leclerc
67 members have this team as their favourite
Replies (0)
Login to reply