MONTMELO, Spain — The “Mad Max” persona, a nickname Max Verstappen reportedly disliked in his younger days, seemed to resurface dramatically at the conclusion of the Spanish Grand Prix on Sunday.
Despite a display of brilliance earlier in the race near Barcelona, Verstappen`s performance was marred by a moment of apparent frustration in the final laps. Following a request from his Red Bull team to let Mercedes` George Russell retake a position, the reigning world champion slowed coming out of Turn 4, allowing Russell past on the outside. However, he immediately accelerated again, making contact with the side of Russell`s car.
The reaction in Formula 1`s cooldown room among the top three finishers was telling. Charles Leclerc, who finished third, gasped “Oh my god” upon seeing the replay. Race winner Oscar Piastri simply exclaimed “Yikes,” while runner-up Lando Norris joked he had done something similar, but only “on Mario Kart.”
To many in the paddock, the move looked intentional, a rash decision born from frustration. When Sky Sports F1`s Rachel Brookes asked Verstappen if it was deliberate after the race, his response was dismissive and arguably disappointing for a four-time world champion: “Does it matter?”
Many would argue that it absolutely does matter. George Russell, whose car was hit, had no doubt about the intent behind the move. “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 lets 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 potential severity. Former world champion Nico Rosberg, serving as a pundit for Sky Sports F1, was more outspoken, suggesting Verstappen`s action warranted a black flag disqualification. “It looked like a very intentional retaliation,” said the 2016 champion. “Wait for the opponent, go ramming into him… That`s something which is extremely unacceptable.”
Verstappen ultimately received a 10-second time penalty for causing a collision, which dropped him to 10th place. He also received three penalty points on his super licence, putting him just one point away from a race ban. This means he must navigate the upcoming races in Canada and Austria without further incidents before penalty points begin to expire from his rolling 12-month total.
Two former world champions, Ayrton Senna and Michael Schumacher, have controversial intentional incidents that mark their legacies. Senna notoriously took Alain Prost off the track to secure the 1990 title, while Schumacher was involved in title-deciding collisions with Damon Hill (1994, won title) and Jacques Villeneuve (1997, lost title).
However, unlike Senna and Schumacher whose controversial actions occurred with a championship on the line, Verstappen`s incident was seemingly over fourth position.
As often happens in his career, Verstappen`s race craft will be a significant talking point leading up to the Canadian Grand Prix. His post-race comments, including his flippant response to Rachel Brookes and his quip about bringing “tissues” when told about Russell`s concerns for young fans, suggest how he intends to handle this scrutiny.
Many have witnessed his exceptional talent on track: his astonishing win in Brazil last year, his lauded pole lap at Suzuka this season, and his stunning pass on Oscar Piastri in Imola two weeks ago are widely praised examples of his excellence.
Yet, criticism regarding the less admirable aspects of his race craft is equally valid.
Much of the goodwill Verstappen has built in recent seasons, solidifying his reputation as one of the sport`s greats, was unfortunately tarnished by this single moment of indiscretion. Fittingly, it was Russell – a past critic of Verstappen – who perhaps best articulated the frustration felt by many watching the brilliant yet sometimes 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 the contrast in Verstappen`s driving, citing examples like flashpoints with Norris last year versus the outstanding pass on Piastri in Imola. “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 reportedly been simmering even before the clash with Russell. Compounding matters, the FIA`s explanation for the 10-second penalty indicated the stewards had no intention of ordering Verstappen to yield the position to Russell in the first place, despite Red Bull preemptively instructing him to do so based on precedents. This left Red Bull perplexed and frustrated that Verstappen`s displeasure boiled over in a situation that might have been entirely avoidable.
The FIA`s clarification adds insult to injury for Red Bull, whose strategic call to pit Verstappen for hard tires near the end left him vulnerable to Leclerc and Russell, who opted for softs. This decision directly led to the scenario culminating in the costly incident. Verstappen himself expressed frustration over the radio upon seeing the hard tires, a consequence of the three-stop strategy the team had committed to early in the race, limiting his available tire compounds.
Red Bull team principal Christian Horner defended the strategy, arguing that staying out on older tires would have resulted in the McLarens passing him anyway. While potentially true, Verstappen`s renowned defensive ability might have offered a fighting chance. As Horner admitted, “With 20-20 hindsight, it`s very easy to say, stay out.”
Nevertheless, it`s difficult to escape the conclusion that the controversy surrounding Verstappen was, to a significant extent, a situation engineered by Red Bull`s own decisions.
Evidence of Verstappen`s growing frustration was visible even before the Russell incident. He has been vocal about the perceived deficiencies of this year`s Red Bull car. His sarcastic comments about the clutch feeling like it was from 1972 (later updated to 1974) and his defense of struggling teammate Yuki Tsunoda – calling him no “Pannenkoek” (a Dutch slang term for useless) and implying the car is difficult to drive – highlight his discontent.
This context makes the boiling over of Verstappen`s deeper frustrations particularly intriguing.
Despite a contract extending until 2028, speculation persists within the paddock that he might depart Red Bull sooner. Aston Martin owner Lawrence Stroll is reportedly keen to recruit the four-time champion. Much attention has been given to a reported contract clause that could allow him to leave Red Bull if he is outside the top four in the drivers` championship by the August summer break. Leaving Barcelona with only a single point from the race, and facing the possibility of a race ban, suddenly makes this scenario seem less improbable than it did before the weekend.
Mercedes boss Toto Wolff observed the situation with notable interest. The incident involved his own driver, Russell, and a driver (Verstappen) Wolff has long been rumored to desire for Mercedes, presenting a complex dynamic.
Despite George Russell`s strong performances this season, his Mercedes contract beyond 2025 remains unconfirmed. While reports vary on how close a deal is, Wolff`s long-standing interest in Verstappen means the possibility of the Dutchman partnering with Lewis Hamilton`s former team remains plausible, especially as long as Russell`s future isn`t fully secured.
Curiously, given Wolff`s typical tendency to defend his drivers emphatically, he remained somewhat ambivalent, notably avoiding outright condemnation of Verstappen. “I mean, if it was road rage, which I can`t imagine, because it was too obvious, that is not good,” Wolff commented. “But the thing is I don`t know what he aimed for… 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.”
