Lewis Hamilton’s missed pit stop during the Singapore Grand Prix continues to raise questions, despite the Ferrari driver taking responsibility for the costly decision that ultimately contributed to him losing a podium position. Former Ferrari mechanic Francesco Cigarini believes some aspects of the incident remain unclear and has even questioned whether Lewis Hamilton may have accepted more of the blame in order to protect the team.
The unusual sequence at Marina Bay came when Ferrari called Lewis Hamilton into the pits during a Virtual Safety Car period, only for the seven-time Formula 1 world champion to remain on track. The decision proved costly, with Lewis Hamilton later losing positions as his tyres deteriorated. Although both the driver and team principal Frédéric Vasseur have explained what happened, Cigarini believes there are still unanswered questions surrounding the communication and decision-making behind the incident.
Former Ferrari mechanic questions Lewis Hamilton’s Singapore pit stop
Francesco Cigarini, a former Ferrari mechanic, discussed the episode in an interview with Fanpage.it. Lewis Hamilton lost a potential podium after failing to enter the pits when Ferrari called him in, before later accepting responsibility for what had happened.
The wider sequence has already been examined in detail through Ferrari’s Singapore pit-stop decision involving Lewis Hamilton, with the driver saying after the race that it had been his choice and apologising for the points lost.
However, Cigarini suggested that Hamilton’s willingness to take the blame could also be interpreted as a sign of loyalty towards Ferrari.
“It is part of maintaining a fair relationship with the team. If I make a mistake, I admit it, but it is also a message: when you make a mistake, you have to take responsibility too. But we are a team, so I protect you. I don’t know how much Lewis actually got wrong, because I saw that he opened the radio but there was no communication, so the dynamics are not completely clear. We don’t know whether Hamilton also wanted to cover a strategic mistake by the team by taking all the responsibility.”
The explanation given by Frédéric Vasseur, as well as Lewis Hamilton’s own comments in Ferrari’s official statement, indicated that the driver had missed the pit-lane entry by mistake. Lewis Hamilton subsequently accepted responsibility for the Singapore strategy outcome, but Cigarini believes the precise sequence still leaves room for questions.
“Maybe they’re covering something up” between Ferrari and Hamilton
Asked whether something about the episode still appeared unclear, Cigarini replied: “Yes, something remains a little murky. If he missed the entry, fine: he took responsibility. But Hamilton said, ‘I chose it.’ So maybe they’re covering something up a little between the team and driver.”
“Maybe it was simply a mistake, but the dynamics are not completely clear. Or perhaps it was simply one of his little lapses. It could have been a lapse at that moment, when he wasn’t completely switched on or wasn’t thinking about the strategy. But I believe that in these situations the driver needs to be helped.”
Cigarini believes Ferrari’s pit wall perhaps should have intervened more decisively to ensure that Lewis Hamilton understood what the team wanted him to do, particularly if the British driver was primarily focused on the race situation.
One interpretation surrounding the episode was that Lewis Hamilton wanted to stay ahead of Charles Leclerc and therefore pursued a strategy that ultimately failed. However, within a Formula 1 team, publicly fuelling the suggestion of an internal conflict would naturally be something Ferrari would want to avoid.
The strategic context surrounding the weekend can also be explored through the Ferrari Pit Stop & Strategy Statistics, which tracks Ferrari’s stops, tyre stints and interventions under Safety Car and Virtual Safety Car conditions.
Cigarini says Ferrari needed a clearer radio instruction
According to Cigarini, Ferrari needed greater clarity and decisiveness when Lewis Hamilton approached the pit-lane entry.
“There needs to be greater clarity and decisiveness. If you want him in and you see him approaching the pit lane, you open the radio and clearly tell him: ‘Box, box.’ Then maybe the driver replies: ‘No, I’m staying on these tyres.’ But at that point, at least the situation is clear.”
Frédéric Vasseur has already defended Ferrari’s handling of the episode and confirmed that the team had instructed Lewis Hamilton to pit. The Ferrari team principal’s response to questions about the Singapore strategy can be read in more detail in Frédéric Vasseur’s explanation of Lewis Hamilton’s Singapore strategy.
For Cigarini, Ferrari’s main priority should be avoiding internal disputes over who was responsible for the lost result.
“Exactly. Because otherwise, one time I take the blame, another time you take the blame, but in the end the result is that you have lost positions. The important thing is not to establish publicly who made the mistake. Those are things to discuss in the debriefings, the famous dirty laundry that should be washed at home.”
“What really matters after a mistake? Having a clear picture, understanding what happened and working to improve the next time. The final performance is what counts. Everything else has to help you understand how not to repeat that situation.”
Could Lewis Hamilton have taken extra blame to protect Ferrari?
Cigarini also argued that Lewis Hamilton’s willingness to shoulder responsibility could ultimately be viewed positively inside Ferrari, even if the complete picture was more complicated than the driver publicly suggested.
“The fact that he takes responsibility is positive for the team. You have to understand whether he took full responsibility because it genuinely was entirely his fault or also to take pressure away from the team.”
“But the team appreciates that kind of attitude anyway. Even if he were 60 per cent responsible and took all the blame, the team would understand that he is trying to protect it. He wants to take some pressure away from the team and put it on his own shoulders. That is very positive for the people working inside the team.”
The Singapore episode formed part of a broader weekend in which Ferrari failed to convert all of the SF-26’s potential into the maximum possible result. The technical and strategic factors behind that outcome are examined further in the Ferrari SF-26 Singapore Grand Prix analysis.
Michael Schumacher comparison highlights Ferrari team culture
Having previously worked with Michael Schumacher, Cigarini was also asked whether he saw similarities between the seven-time world champion and Lewis Hamilton when it came to protecting the team, even following situations in which a driver had clearly made a mistake.
“Yes, absolutely. One characteristic of Michael, and generally of champions at that level, was that externally he could look like a wall, almost impossible to break down, while inside he had many doubts. He was very fair with the team. He also acted as a lightning rod and sometimes took on more responsibility than he actually had.”
According to the former Ferrari mechanic, building a culture in which everyone accepts responsibility remains essential if the team wants to return to winning consistently.
“If Ferrari wants to get back to winning, it has to take this step. It has to strengthen an attitude in which everyone takes responsibility and mistakes are used to grow, not simply to find someone to blame.”
Leave a Reply