Nico Rosberg questions Martin Brundle on-air over Lewis Hamilton and Charles Leclerc incident

Nico Rosberg disagreed with Martin Brundle's analysis of the lap one incident between his former team-mate Lewis Hamilton and Charles Leclerc at the Italian Grand Prix.

Leclerc and Hamilton started in fourth and fifth places on the grid respectively at Monza, but hopes of a double podium finish were dashed within corners.

Hamilton saw a gap on the inside of Leclerc into turn one and took it, but that left him on the outside heading into turn two.

Neither driver backed out of the move and Leclerc understeered wide, banging wheels with his team-mate's Ferrari and sending him into the gravel.

The incident dropped Hamilton down to 10th place, while Leclerc continued in third - but not for long.

At the end of lap 3, Leclerc lost control of his Ferrari coming out of Parabolica and hit the outside wall hard, causing him to retire from the Grand Prix.

Leclerc was okay and got out of the car, but the damage to his Ferrari and the Parabolica barrier meant that there was a lengthy red flag period.

Martin Brundle analyses Leclerc/Hamilton turn one incident

During the interval, F1's television crew showed action replays of the Leclerc and Hamilton incident from various angles, leading Sky Sports F1 co-commentator Brundle to give his take.

"So Leclerc was far enough ahead on the inside of the corner there," Brundle said. "I don't think Leclerc would have taken a penalty, which is rather incidental now, of course.

"Lewis dived down the inside of him into the first apex - fair enough. That's motor racing. Then goes to the outside, which was bold. Leclerc, I think, at the apex was ahead. He was far enough ahead. And on the inside, which is another key element."

When commentator David Croft asked if Leclerc could have left Hamilton more space, Brundle replied: "Probably, if he had enough command over his front tyres, which are not up to pressure and temperature. I suspect he wasn't overly pleased to have... no, he just understeers wide. You can see. He turns the wheel and the car didn't bite. And that's very normal on the first lap.

"I don't believe he would have been penalised.

"If Charles had more command over his front, you can say he should have left his team-mate [more room]. I suspect he was pretty underwhelmed with what happened on the way into the first corner!"

'No way...' - Rosberg analyses Leclerc/Hamilton incident

Croft then passed over to 2016 world champion Rosberg, who had his fair share of battles with Hamilton while the pair were at Mercedes together.

"My thoughts are with Charles at the moment," Rosberg said. "That's a harsh impact. That hurts so much. When you're in the car, that's 60G, and it shakes you up with your head. You can't think straight sometimes. You sometimes struggle to breath afterwards. Your lungs take a hit, your shoulders usually because it's a carbon seat. And your knees very often. But it looked like Charles was okay with the knees. It depends how a driver sets themselves up in the car."

On the Leclerc and Hamilton incident, he said: "That's an easy one. The rules are, if the driver on the outside - which in this case is Lewis - is ahead at some point towards the apex, then the inside must leave room. It's very straightforward and simple. Lewis was aheasd going in, so Charles has to leave room. And he didn't. So it's 100 per cent Charles' fault.

"Could it be because it's a Ferrari racing in Monza [no action taken]?

"The rule is very clear. It is written in black and white. I can tell you which page - page 11."

When Brundle said he'd called the incident in 'exactly the opposite way', Rosberg jokingly replied: "No way! Martin, I thought you knew what you were talking about usually!"

"I think that Charles had the inside line. He was far enough ahead," Brundle said. "My call is that I think he was a bit upset with what happened on the way into the first corner."

"That's true," Rosberg said. "Lewis was too aggressive."