Stewards reject McLaren’s request to review Norris’ United States GP penalty · RaceFans

The stewards of the United States Grand Prix have rejected McLaren’s request for a review of the penalty which cost Lando Norris a podium finish.

McLaren’s request was denied because the stewards deemed they did not supply a significant, new and relevant piece of information, as required by the rules. The stewards of the previous race held a hearing via videoconference involving representatives of McLaren and their rivals Red Bull.

Norris and his team were infuriated by the stewards’ decision to hand him a five-second time penalty for overtaking Max Verstappen off the track at the exit of turn 12 on the 52nd lap of the race. Norris claimed he was forced off the track by Verstappen, who had fallen behind him as they approached the corner, but ran off the track himself at the exit. The decision cost Norris third place in the race to his championship rival and resulted in a six-point swing between the pair.

McLaren attempted to persuade the stewards to reconsider Norris’ penalty by presenting the decision itself – document number 69 of the United States Grand Prix – as a new piece of evidence. The team argued the decision contained a factual error which they had not been aware of at the time of the decision.

The team claimed the stewards incorrectly described Norris as the driver who was overtaking. They argued Norris had already passed Verstappen before they reached the corner, and he was therefore no longer the overtaking driver, and the case should therefore be considered differently.

Red Bull, represented by sporting director Jonathan Wheatley, claimed McLaren had failed to provide evidence which met the required standard. The stewards agreed with them, ruling it was not “relevant” to the issue at stake.

“McLaren appears to submit that the stewards finding that ‘car four [Norris] was not level with car one [Verstappen] at the apex’ was an error and that car four had overtaken car one before the apex (and therefore that car one was the overtaking car) and that this asserted error is itself, a new element,” the stewards ruled.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

“This is unsustainable. A petition for review is made in order to correct an error (of fact or law) in a decision. Any new element must demonstrate that error. The error that must be shown to exist, cannot itself be the element referred to in article 14.”

“In this case, the concept that the written decision (document number 69) was the…