FIA decisions at Imola sparked debate, but Alex Wurz defends the differing safety car calls as justified and rooted in safety.
The two neutralizations during the Imola race sparked questions this weekend, as both Esteban Ocon’s Haas and Andrea Kimi Antonelli’s Mercedes stopped in the same location, yet race control opted for a virtual safety car in the first instance and a full safety car in the second.
Alex Wurz, president of the drivers’ association, confirmed what was stated during Sunday’s live coverage: Antonelli stopped his car further along, and the distance that had to be covered on grass was too great to bring the W16 back to the same spot as the VF-25. Furthermore, with the VF-25 positioned in the opening between the walls, it wasn’t possible to secure it properly.
“I received a lot of questions over the last 24 hours after Imola, from journalists and fans, in my role as a TV consultant, media expert, and of course, this also concerns my role as president of the GPDA,” said Wurz.
“The question was whether there was inconsistency in race control’s decision-making regarding the virtual safety car for the incident involving Esteban Ocon’s Haas at the exit of turn 7, and then shortly after, the stoppage of Kimi Antonelli and his Mercedes, also at turn 7.”
“It may seem like a similar incident, but as I said live on Austrian TV: I believe the race director made the right calls, because where Esteban Ocon’s car stopped, it was relatively easy to push it into the opening.”
“Kimi Antonelli stopped a bit further up, the grass isn’t even there, there’s a dip in that area, and it was just too far, so did the race director need to deploy a recovery vehicle?”
With the need to recover the car from trackside, Wurz considers it appropriate to send out the Safety Car: “And once such a vehicle is on track and has to cross the racing line to reach the car, the race director absolutely made the right call to deploy the safety car.”
“Let’s not forget what happened in Japan with Jules Bianchi, and drivers and everyone said ‘we must learn from that.’ So this decision is not inconsistent—quite the opposite.”
“It was a very good decision in the name of safety. That’s what I said live on TV, and I want to address these concerns here, and thank race control and the FIA for this decision, because it was absolutely in the name of safety—and it is fully in line with what we’ve agreed upon and stated in recent years.”
- Discover More>Racing Bulls 2026: Red Bull Clone or Just a Close Cousin?
- Following us on>Facebook and>Twitter