When Hamilton was F1's bad boy

"He was changing his line under braking, trying to squeeze someone. This is something we have always said we must not do because it's very dangerous."

You're thinking, 'Oh great, another quote about Max Verstappen's driving standards - who is it this time?' But it was said about a different driver at a similar stage in his career to Verstappen.

Back in 2008, Lewis Hamilton was, like Verstappen, in his second season of Formula 1 and attracting criticism from some big names. The quote in question ran in Autosport magazine after that year's Japanese Grand Prix under the headline 'Why does Hamilton annoy his F1 rivals?'.

The person speaking was Alex Wurz, then a Honda test driver and, as now, a shrewd and insightful observer of motorsport. It was at a point when criticism of Hamilton's driving standards had reached its peak and become one of the biggest talking points in F1.

"We need to talk about these things in the drivers' briefings," continued Wurz, "just to establish what drivers can and can't do."

Again, sounds very familiar.

Like Verstappen, Hamilton, then 23, even attracted lurid headlines in the tabloids suggesting if he kept on doing what he was doing he was going to kill someone. That will sound very familiar to anyone following the recent Verstappen versus Jacques Villeneuve war of words.

The headlines in question were a little misleading, based on a Mark Webber quote from the build-up to the Chinese GP in which he cited the death of marshal Paolo Gislimberti at Monza in 2000.

"You can't move around in the braking areas like that," Webber said. "We lost a marshal at Monza when there were guys moving around in the braking areas and it's very hard to change your line if you don't know what is going to happen."

For the record, Webber subsequently criticised the way his words were interpreted ("I never said the word kill. I said a lot of positive things about Lewis") - and he was right to do so - but the point is less what was said eight years ago and more the fact that young drivers often find themselves cast as the villain.

So what exactly had Hamilton done? Well, this was his second season in a rollercoaster early F1 career. Having strung together nine consecutive podiums from his debut, there was then the controversial end to 2007 amid the fallout of the spy scandal, which Hamilton was peripheral to.

But there had been no serious questions about his driving standards in his first full season beyond the odd mishap (similar to Verstappen's debut season, you could say, albeit in a more competitive car).

But he did start to attract criticism the following year. In Canada in June, he shunted into a parked Kimi Raikkonen at the pitlane exit while the Ferrari was stopped at a red light. Criticism ensued, but it was a moment of supreme inattentiveness rather than anything else.

A 10-place grid penalty was the result, leading to him starting 13th at the French GP. On the first lap, he passed Sebastian Vettel's Toro Rosso around the outside into the misleadingly-named Nurburgring chicane on the brakes. But in completing the move, he cut the corner and earned a drivethrough penalty.

At that point, suggestions of victimisation started to rise, although others also questioned Hamilton's rather belligerent approach to the penalty. Hamilton even went as far as to tackle the media criticism directly.

"I am absolutely 100% bouncing back there [the next race at Silverstone], regardless of what's written in the newspapers," said Hamilton after the French GP. "We're going to hit them hard."

Even what he said about the penalty itself suggests that some of the criticism was distracting him - something that Verstappen should probably be wary of.

"I don't particularly feel I did anything," he said. "I went into the corner. I believe I was ahead on the outside and I couldn't turn in on the guy, otherwise we would have crashed so I took the outside line, lost the back on the marbles and went over the kerb.

"I continued because I don't believe I overtook him by going over the kerb, I actually took him before that.

"There's nothing you can do that can distract me. You can keep on giving me penalties and whatever you want to do and I'll keep battling and try to come back with a result."

He did, turning in one of the great wet-weather grand prix wins at Silverstone, but the next controversy wasn't far away.

At Spa, three races later, Hamilton was stripped of victory by a post-race time penalty given for gaining an unfair advantage by cutting the track.

While attempting to go around the outside of leader Raikkonen into the final chicane in late-race rain, he took to the run-off area and rejoined in front of the Ferrari. He did ease off and let Raikkonen back past, but he then immediately launched another move into the ensuring La Source hairpin to take the lead.

By the letter of the law it was a legitimate penalty, for he wouldn't have been able to make that pass without the chicane-cut as even after backing off he was closer to Raikkonen than he would have otherwise been, but it was an incident where common sense really should have prevailed given the circumstances of the race.

After all, Raikkonen subsequently got back ahead, lost the lead again and then crashed out in a frenetic end to the race overshadowed forever by the penalty, so it was hardly the decisive moment.

Such was the vitriol surrounding the decision that one of the stewards, Surinder Thathi, went as far as to say "There was no conspiracy against anybody, McLaren included" after McLaren's appeal against the penalty was deemed inadmissible.

The hearing, which took place ahead of the Singapore GP in October, gave Hamilton the chance to defend his driving while being examined by Ferrari counsel Nigel Tozzi QC.

"I have been a racing driver since I was eight years old and I know pretty much every single manoeuvre in the book, and that's why I'm the best at my job," said Hamilton.

"We are talking about a skilled driver under intense pressure making a split-second decision which no one, not unless they are in Formula 1, can comprehend.

"The last thing I wanted to do is crash into him [at the chicane]. When you have gone so far, you want to finish the race. We had a great battle and there was no need to take stupid risks, so I had to cut the chicane.

"I've since studied the footage about 10 times and I can remember it vividly like it was yesterday. I believe I then gave the advantage back. I honestly, hand on heart feel I did so."

But the crux of the criticism of Hamilton is very often overlooked, for it was at the 2008 Italian GP that rivals started to get involved, in that famous race when Vettel took a sensational win for Toro Rosso.

It's also where Webber got involved. While he was attempting to pass Hamilton into the first chicane, the McLaren driver moved across on Webber in the braking area, hitting the Red Bull and forcing it up the escape road.

In the same race, Hamilton also enraged Toyota driver Timo Glock by pushing him onto the grass into Curva Grande.

While this race is often overlooked, it was Monza even more than Hamilton's mistake at the first corner of the following Japanese GP at Fuji, where he braked too late and forced Raikkonen's Ferrari off track, that sent his driving standards to the top of the agenda.

At the next race in China, Hamilton again addressed the media criticism.

"I've not read the stuff, but I know people have made comments," he said. "That's fine with me. They have the right to their own opinion.

"It's a shame they all think that way, but my driving is why I'm here and why I'm leading the championship, so I'm not disappointed with the way I drive. I do my talking on the track. If other people want to expend their energy thinking about it [the way I drive], that's for them.

"The reason I'm here is because of the way I drive. And, as you can see, I don't clash with people, so I can't be that aggressive."

"If I was in a Force India at the back of the field then no one would have anything to say about me. But everyone has something to say about the people who are at the front and are successful, and whether it's positive or negative it doesn't really matter."

So what's the lesson Verstappen should learn? And, perhaps more important, what should the watching world be taking from this?

The first point is that Hamilton ended that season as world champion, currently the first of three world championships, which in a few months could be four. So some of the more vociferous critics should perhaps cut Verstappen a little more slack as he learns in his early days in F1.

The second point is that Hamilton had to learn how to deal with the scrutiny, and learn not to get too entrenched in a belligerent belief that everyone was out to get him. He also had to learn what situations to get into, and what to avoid - an area Verstappen definitely needs to work on, as proved by his legitimate move at the start of the Belgian GP that, nonetheless, ruined his own race.

As is often the case, reality lay somewhere between the most vocal criticism and the most emphatic defence. So Verstappen should neither feel besieged nor refuse to question whether some of his driving tactics might do him more harm than good.

Jackie Stewart, always a shrewd observer of driver mentality, gave his thoughts about Hamilton in 2008. You might say the same today about Verstappen. More pertinently, perhaps those being the most virulent in their criticism could also learn something about what it's like to be under such scrutiny.

"Lewis Hamilton is already world-famous, thanks to the amazing opportunity he was given last year, and the incredible skill with which he took advantage of it," said Stewart at the time.

"He's now experiencing both the privilege and the penalty of celebrity. He's excited the media so much, and now some people are starting to feel let down. But we should remember that Lewis has only been in F1 for 15 months. He's not the finished article yet - and it's wrong to think that he should be.

"He might not like to hear this, but he has a fundamental lack of experience at the top of the sport. If he asked for my advice, I'd say, 'Take your time, and don't expect too much of yourself'.

"I know because I've been there myself. I had a big accident in my second year, which I was lucky to survive. Over the next few years I changed: I gained experience, which gave me knowledge, which in turn enabled me to deliver."

There's also a telling line from Wurz, in response to the question of whether established rivals use criticism like this as a psychological game.

"Yes, of course. It's a game, isn't it?" said Wurz. "You watch kids playing and that's what they do and we do the same too! It's completely normal; it gives you headlines, they play a game out there of driver warfare."

Remember this every time you see public pronouncements from drivers on this topic. Not every one of them plays games, but some do and exploiting weaknesses is what elite sport is all about.