Charles Leclerc is experiencing a bitter afternoon at the Netherlands Grand. After a strong first stint, solid pace and the view of important points, the Ferrari driver found itself in the Zandvoort barrier after a collision with Andrea Kimi Antonelli.
“I think it was a mistake from Kimi,” Leclerc clarifies. “On a route like this you have to be very aggressive to overtake. But in this case it was just too much. He touched my left rear wheel, and my race was over. That is disappointing.”
The scene occurred in curve three with the notorious steep curve banking, where different lines are possible – but overtaking is always a risk. Antonelli had seen a gap inside, stuck in, and touched Leclercs Ferrari. The result: a failure for the Monegassen and a 10-second penalty for the young Italian.
“No rookie error” – Leclercs differentiated view
Leclerc refers to stamping Antonelli’s action as a classic beginner or rookie maneuver. “I would not call it a rookie error. Something like that can happen to you in the first year or in the fifth. It’s just a mistake that can happen to every driver,” he emphasizes.
At the same time, his disappointment remains noticeable: “The strategy was not the big topic today. We lost everything through this collision.”
Shortly after the incident, it sounded different. Antonelli put Leclerc under pressure with an undercut to which Ferrari reacted. After contacting the Mercedes, Leclerc sparked the Ferrari box to question the second tire change. The older hard tires were still good and the second stop may be unnecessary.
When asked about his mood during the race, Leclerc said: “The tires actually felt not bad. But Kimi had very strong grip on the outlap, and the team decided to get me in to protect the position. In the end it didn’t matter because the race was over with the collision.”
Antonelli: “I was too optimistic”
Andrea Kimi Antonelli, the Mercedes junior, also shows up after the race: “It is a shame, because the pace was good, we were on the way forward. I knew that was probably my best chance because he was on colder tires. I tried it – but it was too much,” the Italian admits.
He was aware of the risk: “It is so difficult to overtake. The longer you drive in the dirty air, the more your tire and your pace suffer. I wanted to do it, but I was not close enough. If I had had half a car length, it might have been possible.”
So the Italian takes responsibility: “I feel bad for Charles. Next time I will probably think twice before I try something like that – unless I am 100 percent sure that it works.”
Vasseur defends strategy and reacts to crash
Ferrari team boss Frédéric Vasseur was not only addressed after the race on the collision, but also about the pit stop decision. Leclerc himself had doubted the radio whether a tire change under safety car was necessary. “Yes and no,” explains Vasseur.
“It is always easy to have a different view after the race. To be honest, it was our only chance to attack Hadjar – either with an undercut or at least with another option. I think it was the right decision at this time. Now, after the crash, it works differently.”
To pure pace, he says: “If you drive behind, overheating everything. So we said Charles that he should let it go. But I had the feeling that we could keep up with Max. The better comparison was Mercedes – we were able to overtake them.”
Vasseur expresses himself about the Antonelli incident: “Kimi came to me after the race, since Charles was no longer on site and apologized. I highly appeal to him. He took a risk, made a mistake and granted it. For me it was a racing accident.
Experts disagree: mistake, racing accident or over -motivated?
While Ferrari sees the matter comparatively relaxed, the TV experts were much more critical. Ralf Schumacher analyzes at “Sky”: “Actually it was over -motivated by Kimi. When he looks in the mirror and leaves a half meter, both drive through the curve. But it was too much.”
Mercedes team boss Toto Wolff takes on Antonelli a little: “Of course, half a meter would have been enough. But you can see this gap in the banking, you stick in – and then the car is understeer. He has to try it, that’s clear. The outcome was unhappy, but it is part of racing.”
Jacques Villeneuve judges much hard: “It was weak. Such a maneuver can be seen in Formula 4 or 3, but not in Formula 1. Everyone makes mistakes, clear – but this was not even a classic high spirits. It was simply poorly calculated. He shouldn’t have done it.”
Damage limitation impossible – Antonelli with a damaged car
Antonelli finished the race, but with considerable damage and two times. “The entire right side of the underbody was broken, including the wing over the tire. The car vibrated strongly, the steering wheel stood wrong. Nevertheless, I tried to get through,” he explains. Without the crash, the Italian believes that a top 7 result would have been possible. “With the punishment, the damage and the safety car phase, it was no longer possible.”
For Vasseur, the view remains: “We had the pace, that was important. Charles was strong, and without the accident we could have won a very good result. But that is part of the racing.”