In Montmelo, Spain, Max Verstappen`s notorious `Mad Max` persona, a nickname he disliked in his youth, resurfaced dramatically at the conclusion of Sunday`s Spanish Grand Prix.
His impressive performance early in the race near Barcelona was overshadowed by a seemingly angry maneuver in the final laps. After being instructed by Red Bull to let George Russell of Mercedes retake a position, the reigning world champion slowed after Turn 4, allowed Russell past on the outside, but then immediately accelerated and made contact with the side of Russell`s car.
In Formula 1`s cooldown room, where the top three drivers first review race highlights, their shared reaction to the incident was clear.
“Oh my god,” gasped third-placed Charles Leclerc as the clip played. Championship leader and race winner Oscar Piastri simply commented, “Yikes.” Runner-up Lando Norris joked he had done something similar, but “on Mario Kart.”
Many in the paddock perceived the move as intentional, a moment where Verstappen`s temper flared, leading to an absurd snap decision. When Sky Sports F1 asked him post-race if it was deliberate, Verstappen gave a dismissive and arguably disappointing response, especially for a four-time world champion: “Does it matter?”
Plenty would argue it does. George Russell, whose car was hit, had no doubt about the Dutchman`s intent.
“It felt very deliberate, to be honest,” Russell stated Sunday evening. “It`s a bit of a shame because Max is clearly one of the best drivers in the world, but maneuvers like that are just totally unnecessary and sort of let him down. It`s a shame for all the young kids looking up, aspiring to be Formula 1 drivers.”
Russell was one of the few downplaying the severity. Former world champion Nico Rosberg, serving as a pundit for Sky Sports F1, was much more critical, suggesting Verstappen`s action warranted immediate disqualification.
“It looked like a very intentional retaliation,” the 2016 champion claimed. “Wait for the opponent, go ramming into him, just like you felt the other guy rammed into you at Turn 1. That`s something which is extremely unacceptable, and I think the rules would be a black flag, yes. If you wait for your opponent to bang into him, that`s a black flag.”
Instead, Verstappen received a 10-second time penalty, dropping him to 10th place at the finish, and three penalty points on his super licence. He is now just one point away from a mandatory race ban. This means he must race cleanly in the upcoming Canada and Austria Grands Prix before his penalty points total begins to decrease over the rolling 12-month period.
Two former world champions have legacies marked by intentional collisions with rivals. Ayrton Senna secured the 1990 title by forcing Alain Prost`s Ferrari off the track at the Japanese Grand Prix. Michael Schumacher won a title in 1994 and lost one in 1997 following crashes with Williams drivers Damon Hill and Jacques Villeneuve, respectively.
At least Senna and Schumacher`s most controversial moments occurred when a championship was at stake. Verstappen`s happened over fourth position.
As has frequently been the case throughout his notable career, Verstappen`s race craft will be a significant topic leading up to the Canadian Grand Prix. His flippant responses to the Sky Sports question and his remark about Russell`s comments concerning setting a bad example for kids (“I`ll bring some tissues next time”) suggested he might dismiss the renewed focus lightly. (However, on Monday, after publication, Verstappen showed remorse, admitting the clash “was not right” and “shouldn`t have happened.”)
Most recent F1 watchers have witnessed numerous examples of his on-track brilliance. His astonishing win in Brazil last year is considered one of the sport`s finest modern performances. His pole lap at Suzuka this season was lauded as one of the greatest ever. His stunning pass on Piastri for the lead at the Emilia-Romagna Grand Prix two weeks prior is destined to be remembered as an all-time great maneuver. Such praise is well-deserved.
However, criticism for the darker aspects of his race craft is equally valid.
Much of the positive work Verstappen has done in recent seasons to build his legacy as one of the sport`s top talents was tarnished on Sunday by a single moment of poor judgment. Of all people, it was Russell — a past critic of Verstappen — who perhaps best articulated the frustration of watching the brilliant yet flawed four-time world champion.
“Max is such an amazing driver and so many people look up to him, it`s just a shame things like that continue to occur,” the Mercedes driver said. “It`s totally unnecessary and it never seems to benefit himself.”
Russell highlighted this duality with different examples: various clashes with Norris last year versus his stunning pass on Piastri in Imola two weeks ago.
“You see in Austin last year some of the best moves ever, and then you go to Mexico and he lets himself down a bit. You go to Imola, you see one of the best moves you`ll see in a long time, and then this happens. It cost him and his team a lot of points.”
Boiling Point
Verstappen`s frustration had been quietly building before his collision with Russell. The FIA`s report explaining his 10-second penalty likely offered little comfort.
Based on previous incidents this season, Red Bull anticipated the stewards would order Verstappen to return the position to Russell, so the team preemptively instructed their driver to do so. The FIA statement noted that the stewards had no intention of issuing such a ruling. Red Bull was left puzzled by this Sunday evening, frustrated that Verstappen`s simmering displeasure had boiled over in an entirely avoidable situation.
That FIA admission will add insult to injury for Red Bull, whose decision to pit Verstappen for hard tires late in the race left him vulnerable to Leclerc and Russell – who switched to softs – attacking him at the restart. This initiated the sequence of events culminating in the costly flashpoint. Verstappen had sworn over the radio upon seeing the hard tires; due to the three-stop strategy committed to early for car No. 1, it was all he had left in his allocation.
Red Bull felt fresh hards were a better option than staying out, inheriting the lead, and fighting the charging cars behind with a tire disadvantage. Neither scenario was ideal, but when choosing between Verstappen defending a lead on slightly worn softs versus defending third on new hard tires against rivals on new softs, Red Bull chose the harder task – especially with only six racing laps remaining after the restart.
“The McLarens would have passed him,” Red Bull team principal Christian Horner insisted Sunday, referring to the possibility of staying out and defending the lead. While likely true, of all F1 drivers, Verstappen, known for his aggressive wheel-to-wheel approach, is perhaps the most likely to hold a lead in such a situation. “You`re faced with the choice of a brand-new set versus an eight-lap-old set that have taken a bit of a pounding. With 20-20 hindsight, it`s very easy to say, stay out.”
It`s difficult to avoid the feeling that the Verstappen controversy was a mess entirely of Red Bull`s own making.
Even before the clash with Russell, evidence of Verstappen`s building frustration was apparent. He has never hesitated to voice concerns about the deficiencies of this year`s Red Bull car. During the Monaco Grand Prix, he quipped on the radio that his clutch felt like it was from the 1972 race. When Verstappen complained about a similar car part Sunday in Barcelona, race engineer Gianpiero Lambiase referenced the Monaco comment, only for Verstappen to suggest it now felt like it was from 1974. A day earlier, he defended struggling Yuki Tsunoda, telling Dutch media his Japanese teammate was not a `Pannenkoek` (Dutch slang for `pancake,` meaning useless) and again suggesting the repeated inability of talented drivers to extract performance from the other Red Bull indicated the team had designed a difficult car to race.
This is where Verstappen`s deeper frustrations boiling over become fascinating.
Although he is under contract until 2028, some in the paddock remain convinced he will leave the team before then. Aston Martin owner Lawrence Stroll is reportedly very interested in bringing the four-time world champion to his team. Much has been made of a reported clause in Verstappen`s contract allowing him to leave Red Bull if he is lower than fourth in the drivers` championship by the August summer break. Given he left Barcelona with a single point from the race and faces a potential one-race ban if he incurs further penalties, that scenario suddenly appears less far-fetched than before the weekend.
Mercedes boss Toto Wolff offered an interesting perspective Sunday evening. The two drivers involved in the contentious incident represent contrasting ideas that must have been considered by Wolff for some time.
Despite his strong form this season, Russell has not yet signed a Mercedes contract beyond 2025 – paddock reports vary on how close the two sides are to an agreement. Whatever the truth, it`s known that Wolff has long harbored a desire to bring Verstappen to Mercedes, and as long as Russell`s future isn`t secured, the possibility of the Dutchman joining Lewis Hamilton`s former team remains plausible.
Curiously, given Wolff`s usual tendency to strongly defend his drivers in controversial incidents, he remained neutral and, perhaps tellingly, reluctant to criticize Verstappen harshly.
“I mean, if it was road rage, which I can`t imagine, because it was too obvious, that is not good,” Wolff said Sunday. “But the thing is I don`t know what he aimed for. Did he want to let George past, and immediately repass? Put the car, George the car ahead, and then like the old DRS games, letting him past at the right way? Or… for me, it`s just incomprehensible [if it was intentional]. But again, I don`t know exactly what the motivations were, and I don`t want to judge on it and say this was road rage. Let`s see what his arguments are. It wasn`t nice.”
Dominic Ashworth