“Shouldn’t Happen Again”: Following Tragic Death of Dilano Van’t Hoff, Fernando Alonso Issues Contradictory Solutions to Lance Stroll to Avoid Such Horrific Outcomes

Spa-Francorchamps is one of the most beautiful racing tracks in the motorsport world. But the Belgium track is one of the deadliest ones too. And as of yesterday, the track witnessed its 49th casualty in its history at the hands of 18-year-old Dutch driver Danilo Van’t Hoff. 49 is no small number, and since the accident, burning questions regarding the safety of drivers in motorsport, especially while driving in Spa, have come to light. And Aston Martin drivers Fernando Alonso and Lance Stroll have led the charge.

Van’t Hoff was competing in the second race of the Formula Regional European Championship at Spa. But the race conditions weren’t the usual. The race was taking place in extreme wet-weather conditions. Due to the immense spray heading into the Kemmel Straight, the Dutchman spun and was hit by Adam Fitzgerald’s car at full speed. Due to the impact force, Van’t Hoff died on the spot, and the motorsport world lost yet another driver.

Fernando Alonso raises concerns about safety regarding visibility

The incident surprised everyone, including F1 drivers, because this wasn’t the first time they witnessed an accident such as this. Less than four years ago in 2019, Anthoine Hubert, competing in F2 then, crashed into the wall at Turn 3. The impact with the wall pushed him backward, right into the driving line of Juan Manuel Correa, who crashed into him head-on, and Anthoine died on impact. Hubert’s crash raised questions about safety throughout the motorsport industry. But given that it happened again with Van’t Hoff—not to mention in wet-weather conditions—the measures taken are still insufficient. 

After witnessing the incident, Fernando Alonso said, as quoted by Motorsport.com Turkey, “People watching at home can’t understand that we can’t see anything. Visibility at that speed in the rain is a big problem, and that’s what happened today.” [Translated by Google]

The visibility in F1 cars is already low, but it worsens when wet conditions add to the mix. Drivers drive mostly based on instinct. Considering Van’t Hoff was just 18 and competing in a junior category, how was it safe to make them drive in those conditions?

Read More: Horrific Reality of Max Verstappen’s Favourite Track Exposed as Red Bull React to Tragic Death of 18-Year-Old Prodigy 

Alonso added, “This shouldn’t happen again in the future. I don’t know if the problem is Spa, but if there’s a car in the middle of the road and you can’t see it, it’s a problem.” According to Alonso, Fitzgerald mainly crashed into Van’t Hoff because he couldn’t see him spinning. While Alonso blamed the visibility, Stroll begged to differ.

Lance Stroll blames the circuit for the accident

Turns 2, 3, and 4 at Spa—the Eau Rouge-Raidillon section—are one of the most iconic corners in motorsport. But as iconic as they are, there have been concerns about the safety of the high-speed corners, especially after the Hubert incident. As per The Race, while talking about the accident, Stroll said, “It’s not fair what happened, and that corner needs to be looked at and changed because we’ve lost two young talents in the span of five years. It needs to be changed, that corner. We’re going there in a few weeks. It’s horrible what happened today.” 

Contrary to Alonso’s belief, Stroll is convinced that the track is at fault. The F1 circus is heading there in less than a month, but it’s not just a question of F1 drivers’ safety. The F2 and F3 championships also take place at the circuit, and Stroll didn’t fail to mention how that also adds to the concerns. It’s not just him and his competitors who’ll be at risk. “Everyone that goes through that corner” will be in danger.

Watch This Story: When Fernando Alonso Had a Mysterious Crash in F1 Causing Alleged Memory Loss 

What do you think caused Van ‘t Hoff’s accident at Spa? Was it the lack of visibility or the Eau Rouge-Raidillon curve (that leads into the Kemmel Straight) that was responsible?