Ferrari Faces Penalty in Vegas Despite Unusual Collision Damage
Nov.17 - In a dramatic turn of events tonight in Las Vegas for the Formula 1 world, the FIA Stewards have made a pivotal decision regarding Ferrari's Car #55 driven by Carlos Sainz during FP1, following a detailed report from the FIA Technical Delegate. The report, highlighted in Document 16, revealed that the car suffered extensive damage, rendering critical components such as the Survival Cell, Internal Combustion Engine, Energy Store, and Control Electronics irreparable. This damage was notably caused by a collision with an external object on the track.
In response to this unforeseen incident, the Scuderia Ferrari F1 team behind Car 55 formally requested a special exemption from the FIA. They sought permission to replace the Energy Store from outside their allocated pool, hoping to do so without incurring the usual penalties. This request put the spotlight on the flexibility of the Sporting Regulations in situations involving external and uncontrollable factors.
The FIA Stewards, after careful consideration, which included reviewing video footage and examining Ferrari's declaration sheet, acknowledged the unique and unfortunate nature of the circumstances. However, they emphasized the necessity to adhere to the Formula 1 Sporting Regulations as they stand. Article 2.1 of these regulations strictly mandates officials, including the Stewards themselves, to enforce the rules without exception.
Consequently, despite the unusual situation, the Ferrari team must face the mandatory penalty as outlined in Article 28.3 of the Sporting Regulations. The Stewards expressed their recognition of the mitigating circumstances and noted that, if the regulations had provided them the discretion, they would have granted the derogation. However, the current rules offer no room for such leniency in this case.
Ferrari has been reminded of their right to appeal the Stewards' decisions. This appeal process is governed by Article 15 of the FIA International Sporting Code and Chapter 4 of the FIA Judicial and Disciplinary Rules, and it must be initiated within the set time limits.
This decision underscores the independent nature of the Stewards' role in Formula 1. Their judgments are based solely on the regulations and evidence presented, without influence from external bodies, including the FIA. This incident highlights the ongoing debate within the F1 community about the rigidity of the Sporting Regulations, especially in scenarios involving factors beyond the teams' control.
Sainz will get a ten places grid penalty in his next Grand Prix start.
✅ Check out more posts with related topics:
How surprising, but unfair to penalize over a foreign object entirely out of any team’s control.
As I said in another thread Liberty Media have made F1 into a total farce.
They've hyped up this race and can't even sort out frigging man-hole covers, no such problems in Monaco or other street circuits.
Something completely out of Ferrari's hands, something that could've been a potentially huge accident, and Ferrari not only have to face the cost of the replacing their entire car but get penalised for the fact that Liberty can't do their jobs properly! Complete and total farce!
AGREED, ridiculous! I hope Ferrari take liberty to court.
Ferrari should skip the race. the FIA is more interested in control than fairness.
Actually the manhole cover issue has happened before in Long Beach, when F1 ran in Dallas and at Azerbaijan. The organizers had to weld the manhole covers each time after the first practice as a car passing the manhole cover would pick it up enough with a tire rolling over it for the air flow from the car to lift it into the path of usually a following car.
First, it wasn't a manhole cover. It was a water bib ripped out of the pavement. Second, entirely driver error. lol
ROR I have to agree, Alonso who drove in front of Sainz, did see the object and avoided it at 320 kph / 200 mph...
Noticing a tiny object in time at high speed is easier said than done, so just because one happens to notice doesn't automatically mean everyone else would also notice in time.
Come on! Shouldn't be the 20 best drivers in the world be able to do that? Esspecially when some one in front of you is showing you the way...
Spaniards have always had a problem all singing from the same hymn sheet, quite a divided country really
Along the route normally travelled by our Fearless Leader to and from his busy place of work, all manhole covers; water valve covers and their kin, are all welded shut. Not so much for the odd risk that one may be dislodged and provide an opportunity to jounce Dear Leader's 12,000 lb armored Suburban.
Oh no, but to prevent a sniper or other unwelcome person from bringing to bear and discharging a weapon suitable in size and strength to bring about regime change in the Democratic People's Republik of Kanada.
I find it surprising that ANY metal cover of any dimension had not already been welded to it's female support structure.
That the Stewards' can't see the wisdom of allowing Ferrari to effect necessary repairs penalty-free - under reasonable FIA supervision, of course - is boggling. Just confirms what the rest of us 'common folk' already know all to well - Dearest Leader, and FIA Stewards' must be gotten rid of - and replaced by reasonably minded individuals - like Stroppy, or ROR, or Susan, and - dare I say it - me.
By "Busy-place-of-work" I did not mean to infer that place to be Parliament Hill in downtown Ottawa.
Dearest Leader does all his heavy lifting at "Club Ottawa" - a bath-house for the exclusive use of the male 'upper-echelon' of the Liberal Party of Canada. Apparently, his favorite dish is the spit-roast.
Actually, the faucet cover was welded in place. The entire thing got yanked from the ground. That Newey guy has designed in some serious sucking action. (that's Blo's conspiracy).
Fia reminds me of a company i used to work , some one new comes in changes a few rules adds a few , stays a while then leaves, and the next and the next before you know it , no-one there has the common sense approach , all too busy covering there own mistakes or feathering there own nest, or more usually performing the headless chicken approach when a mistake pops up, its been said before--Continuity--aka Charlie W.
Rules are rules - same as with the plank issues in Austin recently that being track surface not fit for purpose on the day.
Las Vegas track surface being new was not tested in a practical way ie., running ground effect racing cars around the circuit prior to FP1.
I understand having to follow the regulations…. But don’t the regulations also say something about race organizers (or whoever) ensuring the track is maintained in safe racing conditions?
Entireley unfair.
Can an appeal be made to FIA and they can overrule the stewards decision who did not want to enforce the penalty.?
Does somebody know whether that is possible ? Or an appeal to any other body who can overturn tbe decision before the race. I'm sure all the other drivers would want the penalty overturned.
Les, yes it is unfair. But, as for "all the other drivers would want the penalty overturned.", are you kidding? I can hear the "yeah, but what when I......" retorts now.
Ferrari are seemingly incapable of getting it right , even with all the right ingredients, they find a way to F**k it up, or bad luck just keeps hanging around them, unfortunate but thats just how it is, cheers up Fastfreddy the 24 season will very soon be her
They got screwed on this one. But, no worries, now the red team can concentrate on a way to bollux the #16 's race.
keep your communist talk to yourself especially the part about taking down a government by weapon. save it for when you move to north Korea. you have no idea how lucky you are and you waste your breath on giberish. you can shut up about your freedom of speech as you use yours pointlessly and disrespectfully wastefully. you have such an interesting way to make F1 commentary. i should pay attention more learn from the best eh. you sure know how to waste your free time. producing your vile bile instead of a productive useful life. if you've got nothing to say about F1 then dont say it here. this is not your fifedom nor is your country. instead of simply having fun and engaging with like minded fans your disrespect is what we get. you're unconscionable. you seem hell bent on tearing things down instead of being productive and a contributor. really sad for you as the impression you leave isn't a good one . yes you should be embarrassed. you probably don't know how to do that well either. I'm guessing that in your world there's no freedom of speech for others. try to take these words quietly respectfully and politely . i dare you . i bet you're not up to that task. if only you knew or were capable of learning a different way . but that's wishful thinking isn't it. some are wise enough to know when they over step and are kind enough to look in a mirror and say i made a mistake . are you one?
What he f**k are you blathering on about? Are you on drugs?
ROR.
I can't think of too many occassions when a penalty has been applied in such a situation as this , it was no fault of Sainz. And I can't recall the stewards ever saying that if they we8re able they wouldn't apply a penalty.
So I don't think any driver could offer up a comparable penalty tbat has been applied to them.
Just imo.
ROR
I thought you might have been able to answer my other query in my post about an appeal , does anybody know whether an appeal is possible, I realise time is running out if an appeal is possible to get it done before the race so Sainz lines up in his rightful position in P2
I am a lawyer and I assumed the regulations were drawn up by lawyers but they didn't think to put in an exception to allow for situations such as this one.Surely somebody would have thought there might be cases where it is out of the control of the drivers and teams.
I would have thought that it could covered as a force majeure under the regulations, but as you know F1 regs have been a constant 'patch and go' evolution. That's why I mentioned that a strong race director like Charlie Whiting would have found a solution.
My understanding is that MB insisted that no appeal was possible because the rule was not misapplied, and that the other nine teams would support a reversal. Totster at his best. Again, lack of a strong race director. That's my take.
Derek
Plank issues in Austin not the same.
It came about because the ride height should have been higher. The other 2 cars tested their planks weren't a problem. And the teams knew about the bumps on the circui beforehand.
This item coming up was not known and not forseeable as you would assume it was properly secured.
Correct. Like it or not the plank rule was properly applied in Austin. Unlike LV, Austin was black & white.
early Sunday mornings were never my forte, I hope the race delivers, or im going to be grumpy all day, sing Donny sing
That George Zimmerframes a wild one, he wants to calm down or hell wet himself Again.....
Scary guy. Hope he's on the international do not fly list.