HomeEnginesFerrari's request to review Carlos Sainz penalty dismissed by FIA stewards

Ferrari’s request to review Carlos Sainz penalty dismissed by FIA stewards

The Australian Grand Prix’s stewards have rejected Ferrari’s try to reopen the investigation into Carlos Sainz’s in-race penalty.

Sainz dropped from fourth place to final within the closing outcomes of the race attributable to a five-second penalty for making contact with Fernando Alonso at a late red-flag restart.

The stewards issued the penalty in the course of the third and closing pink flag earlier than a security automotive end and located the Ferrari driver wholly in charge for the collision.

Sainz was furious with the choice over group radio, saying it was the “most unfair penalty I’ve seen in my life”.

He additionally stated the stewards ought to have waited to listen to from him earlier than making a choice — one thing the stewards shouldn’t have to do in the event that they challenge an in-race penalty.

After the race, Ferrari lodged a petition to assessment the stewards’ determination, which, if profitable, would have seen the stewards rethink their determination and doubtlessly alter the results of the race.

Nevertheless, in an effort to reopen the case Ferrari was required to supply new and related info that had not been out there to the stewards on the time of the choice.

Ferrari offered the next three parts:

a) the telemetry knowledge of Sainz’s automotive after the second restart.
b) Sainz’s witness assertion; and
c) different driver’s witness statements, which quantity to data of post-race interviews given by Alonso in addition to different drivers.

All three had been rejected.

Ferrari additionally believed there was a precedent for reopening the case primarily based on an accident between Sergio Perez and Felipe Massa on the 2014 Canadian Grand Prix.

The investigation into that incident was reopened as Perez, who was driving for Power India on the time, had been hospitalised after the crash and was unable to attend the post-race listening to into the accident.

Regardless of reopening the case, Perez’s penalty, which was a grid drop on the subsequent race, was upheld.

Nevertheless, the Australian Grand Prix stewards stated the 2 incidents weren’t comparable.

“The distinguishing characteristic right here is that our determination [regarding Sainz in Australia] was made in-race,” an announcement stated. “We deemed it pointless for us to listen to from SAI or hear from some other driver to resolve that he was wholly in charge for the collision.

“A call that we, and different Stewards panels, routinely take and are inspired to take, when the reason for the collision is evident and there’s a want for time penalties to be issued as shortly as potential.”

The stewards went on to clarify why they’d rejected all three parts offered by Ferrari.

“a) Telemetry: The telemetry knowledge of itself is just not a major and related new ingredient required to resolve who was at fault for the collision. The Stewards have entry to a substantial quantity of telemetry knowledge. We had been additionally ready to entry such knowledge. The telemetry knowledge offered within the Petition is at greatest ambiguous and in our view didn’t exculpate SAI however actually corroborated our determination that he was wholly in charge for the collision. He says he braked tougher however couldn’t cease the automotive due to chilly tyres. He states additional {that a} gradual formation lap contributed to the chilly tyres.

“There are two quick factors. First, even when that’s true, the presentation of telemetry exhibiting his braking level is just not a major new ingredient for the needs of Artwork.14.

“Second, the situations of the observe and the tyres was one thing that each competitor wanted to bear in mind and adapt to. In making an attempt to brake late whereas racing GAS, he adopted the danger that he, as a driver, would lose management of his automotive. In



Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Most Popular