Connect with us

Formula 1

Ferrari’s Penalty Appeal Rejected by F1 Stewards



Ferrari Penalty Appeal Rejected by F1 Stewards

Ferrari’s pursuit of justice for Carlos Sainz’s five-second penalty at the Australian Grand Prix has hit a dead end, as Formula 1 stewards reject the team’s request for a penalty reassessment.

The request by Ferrari to reassess the penalty imposed on Carlos Sainz during the Australian Grand Prix has been rejected by the Formula 1 race stewards.

Ferrari was granted an opportunity to present their arguments for reopening the investigation through a virtual hearing held on Tuesday.

The team had submitted a request to reevaluate Sainz’s five-second penalty, which resulted from colliding with Fernando Alonso during the final standing restart and caused him to lose points. The aim was to determine if “a significant and relevant new element exists [Article 14.3 of the Code]” regarding the incident or decision.

During the hearing, Ferrari team principal Fred Vasseur, racing director Laurent Mekies, and Sainz himself provided evidence. The three “elements” they believed constituted new significant evidence were the car’s telemetry, Sainz’s testimony, and the post-race interviews of other drivers, including Alonso.

However, the stewards dismissed all three claims.

Upon rejecting the appeal, the stewards determined that no “substantial and pertinent new information, which was inaccessible to the parties requesting the review during the initial decision, was present.”


Ferrari’s argument seemed to reference a past successful appeal by Force India after the 2014 Canadian GP, citing it as a “precedent for the proposition” that a driver’s statement and telemetry data could be considered “a significant and relevant new element.”

The five-place grid penalty in question was given to Sergio Perez for his collision with Felipe Massa while defending fourth place on the final lap of the Montreal race.

However, the stewards determined that the “factual circumstances” between Ferrari’s petition and Force India’s case were “quite different.” One major distinction was that Perez hadn’t been able to present his case when the penalty was first assigned, as he had been taken to the hospital after the collision.

The Australian GP stewards noted that another key difference was that their decision in Sainz’s case was made during the race. They stated that they didn’t need to hear from Sainz or any other driver to determine he was entirely at fault for the collision.

According to the stewards, such decisions are routinely made and encouraged when the cause of the collision is clear and time penalties need to be issued as swiftly as possible.

Although Force India’s request for a review was successful, the penalty was ultimately upheld after a hearing at the Austrian GP two weeks later.

Ferrari team principal Fred Vasseur expressed his hope for an “open discussion” with the stewards to understand why Sainz was penalized during the race and not given a hearing afterward.


This approach contrasts with the investigation into the crash between Alpine drivers Esteban Ocon and Pierre Gasly, which occurred shortly after Sainz and Alonso’s collision and went unpunished. Additionally, a restart collision involving Logan Sargeant rear-ending Nyck de Vries’ AlphaTauri was not investigated at all.

Ferrari’s Penalty Appeal Rejected by F1 Stewards 2023 Ferrari’s Penalty Appeal Rejected by F1 Stewards 2023 Ferrari’s Penalty Appeal Rejected by F1 Stewards 2023 Ferrari’s Penalty Appeal Rejected by F1 Stewards 2023

Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.