The focus of Ferrari’s anger over Carlos Sainz Jnr’s Australian Grand Prix penalty wasn’t simply the fact that the call went against him, but that they didn’t get an opportunity to argue his case.
Sainz’s immediate reaction on being told of his penalty, while waiting for the race to restart, was to plead with his team to ensure he got a hearing. Ferrari therefore triggered the ‘right to review’ process not just in the hope of overturning Sainz’s penalty, but to get the hearing they felt they had been unfairly denied.
As the stewards had not heard Sainz’s explanation for his collision with Fernando Alonso, Ferrari submitted it as evidence which they claimed was sufficiently new, significant and relevant to trigger the reopening of the case. They failed because the stewards did not agree with them.
But Ferrari are not along in seizing on any opportunity they get to press their case to the powers-that-be in an effort to tilt the playing field in their favour.
The potentially damaging consequences of this have played out before. The infamous conclusion to the 2021 Abu Dhabi Grand Prix featured both Red Bull and Mercedes ferociously lobbying race director Michael Masi, to the point that he made an error which influenced the outcome of the world championship and led to him losing his job.
In response to the that the FIA drew the correct conclusion that teams should not be allowed to pressure the race director to make calls which favour them. This was a sensible move, and the practice could be applied effectively elsewhere to speed up the often ponderous decision-making process.
Sainz’s clash with Alonso was one of three which occured following the lap 57 standing restart in the Australian Grand Prix. Bafflingly, despite their obvious similarities, all three were handled differently.
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
Ferrari may not agree, but the stewards’ call on Sainz exemplified how such racing incidents should be handled. He clearly went too deep into the corner, crashed into a blameless driver and spoiled their race (notwithstanding the fact a separate decision by the race director later restored Alonso to the position Sainz cost him, an option which is rarely available).
The stewards responded swiftly and issued a proportionate penalty. They did not speak to either driver, and had no reason to, as they pointed out in their…
Click Here to Read the Full Original Article at RaceFans…