Pierre Gasly, Red Bull, Baku City Circuit, 2019

Teams want rethink on Friday penalties affecting races – Horner

2019 F1 season

Posted on

| Written by and

Formula 1 teams want to put a stop to driver’s races being affected by penalties occured in Friday practice, according to Red Bull team principal Christian Horner.

Pierre Gasly had to start the Azerbaijan Grand Prix from the pit lane after he failed to stop at the weigh bridge when ordered to do so.

Horner said teams want such penalties to be reconsidered.

“I think everybody agreed in a meeting we had [on Saturday] with [F1 motorsport director] Ross Brawn and all of the teams that penalties on Friday that affect the rest of the weekend need a a bit of a revisit.

“I think that penalty was too harsh for the crime that was committed. If he’d been 50 kilos underweight the penalty would have only been the same.”

It was the first time penalty has been applied for three years. The rules state the team could have avoided the penalty if Gasly’s car had been returned to the weigh bridge immediately after he drove past it.

Horner said the team had been preoccupied with carrying out a simulation of a ‘stacked’ pit stop, and Gasly had not noticed the lights directing him to the weigh bridge.

“Obviously the driver’s the one that’s seeing the light. Usually there is also a reminder. But we were focused on doing a double pit stop.

“He’d been told to push to practice the pit lane entry which is a bit different here, he had a snap of oversteer on the way in, he’s missed the lights, the team’s focused on the first pit stop as a double pit stop for [Max Verstappen]. So it was just one of those things.”

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

2019 F1 season

Browse all 2019 F1 season articles

66 comments on “Teams want rethink on Friday penalties affecting races – Horner”

  1. Christian Horner wants to put a stop to Red Bull driver’s races being affected by penalties occured by being too stupid to stop at the FIA weighing bridge when told in Friday practice, according to Red Bull team principal Christian Horner.

    1. @proesterchen I couldn’t have put it any better myself, LOL.

      1. @jerejj, quite – I wonder whether Horner would be quite so quick to complain if the penalties were being applied to Ferrari or Mercedes instead of to Red Bull. He certainly did not find it objectionable when Magnussen was penalised a few years ago, or when Sainz Jr was penalised whilst driving for Toro Rosso for the same offence the year prior to that.

    2. Indeed @proesterchen, @jerejj.

      I can see good arguments for the idea – but the ones brought up by Horner are just “we couldn’t be bothered to care”.

      So these arguments rather show that the penalty affecting their race is exactly what is needed to make sure that they won’t ignore the FIA weighbridge next time.

      It’s not as if they got it at a worse time than drivers who got called onto the weighbridge during qualifying and missed a hot lap or dropped out in Q1 because of that in recent years.

      1. This is just more ‘let’s jump on anything Horner says’ stuff. Conveniently not examining his words closely, or blatantly ignoring them for the sake of the slam.

        Firstly, they were not ‘told’ to go to the weighbridge. A light went on just when Gasly had some oversteer and he missed the light. The team was concentrating on practicing a stacked stop. It was a perfect storm of events and all Horner is saying is that given they were not trying to pull off some massive cheat, the penalty was draconian for the ‘crime’ and the teams seem to agree that could be addressed. Why ignore that the teams all agreed this is something that could be looked at, and make it all about Horner, unless you just like to make things all about Horner? Why not slam the other teams then for their equally blatant disregard, if they agreed with Horner.

        And to say ‘we couldn’t be bothered to care’ is equally inaccurate in any attempt to slam Horner. Of course they care. Nothing balatantly intentional happened here to break the rules. That should be taken into account, just as when drivers are hauled in to the stewards room after a race incident to give their viewpoint, as the stewards take into account a drivers level of intention or lack thereof. It matters for example if a driver immediately apologizes over the radio for a boneheaded move. That driver would not likely need to be hauled into the stewards office afterwards to explain himself. There are nuances to everything.

        1. This is just more ‘let’s jump on anything X says’ stuff. Conveniently not examining his words closely, or blatantly ignoring them for the sake of the slam.

          eh, @robbie, did you notice how that could be easily directed at your post here?

          @bascb wasn’t unreasonable in saying that Red Bull apparently did not make it a priority and paid the price (though his words were flippant – fitting to Horner imo – enough to trigger you) but agreed that there are good reasons why reasonable people could find the price improper or too high.

          I might well argue too, going into your ‘defense’ that the red light in the pit lane is how drivers/teams are told to get weighed/checked; and how you completely ignore that technical infringements (the reason for the weighbridge) have always been about the technical situation, for good or bad. Here, technical guilt was accepted as fact, making your argument about no bad intentions irrelevant.

        2. The FIA did tell Gasly that he had to go to the weighbridge. You write it yourself – according to the rules the light going green for a driver there means they HAVE to go to the weighbridge.

          And we have seen this happen quite often. And it every time we hear about it is when either a driver gets penalized for NOT heeding the instruction, or when they complain because following the instruction hurt them (most often in qualifying) Remember Vettel driving off in anger and damaging the scales last year when he felt the FIA were taking too long?

          As I mentioned in my comment, I can see solid arguments for changing this. But “my driver ignored a technical inspection and got penalized” is not a strong argument at all.

          1. Mark in Florida
            5th May 2019, 21:12

            Not a fan of Red Bull yet there is some validity in what he is saying. This is not a race infraction it is a procedural infraction. A drivers weekend shouldn’t be crushed because of it. Since this is a procedural fault of the driver he should get a point of two on his licence and the team should pay a hefty fine in an amount that will be meaningful enough not to do it again. To say it’s all on the driver can’t be true, this is a team sport. They both missed the weight bridge lights due to whatever distractions were happening. Punishment should be meeted out. But it should reflect the severity of the infraction not some draconian penalty that kills good racing.

          2. @boysber And again, this is not about what the rule is, nor the many ways a driver or team can break a rule. This is merely that apparently teams have agreed that the penalty for some minor infringements committed on Friday need not affect a driver and team all the way through Sunday. So they’re going to discuss that further it would seem. Neither Horner nor I have tried to claim rules shouldn’t be there for all that there are currently rules about.

        3. @robbie The two electronic displays on the right were showing his number and the first three letters of his surname already before the snap of oversteer at the slight left-turn before the start of the actual pit lane fast lane happened.

        4. @robbie What I mean is, yes, the penalty for this type of infringement perhaps could be different, less severe, but it still doesn’t change the fact that a driver should pay more attention to his surroundings when entering a pit lane just in case there might be a call (via electronic displays) for weighing appearing.

          1. @jerejj True, and Horner would agree. He’s not debating whether some things should go unpunished, just whether the penalties for some minor things on Friday need affect a driver and team all the way through Sunday.

        5. Gasly violated the rules and received a penalty. No one will argue that’s not fair. The question here is why are these rules there in the fist place? Why should missing the weight bridge in free practice on Friday result in such a big punishment on Sunday? What is to gain in free practice by driving underweight? I’d argue that the FIA should only weigh cars in sessions that matter, qualifying and the race.

        6. If @robbie was red bull’s lawyer, theyd hang.

          Not a single thing he said brought up any good points. Everything he said proved what BasCB’s says is 100% correct.

          Dont want penalties ruining your race? stop doing things to receive penalties.

    3. How about instead of attacking the messenger, more attention is paid to the message?

      A mistake was made during practice, by the driver and the team, which led to the driver being excluded from qualifying.

      This isn’t the team trying to duck scrutineering, or using wings that are designed to get around the rules for deflection tests, or use a ride-height adjuster that doesn’t require a tool, or even a “movable aerodynamic device”– this the driver and the team both missing a blinking light while they’re focused on a stacked pit-stop, IN PRACTICE.

      Further, the penalty is far worse than what happened for the ride-height adjuster (ordered to fix it), the flexible wings (tests were changed), or a number of other issues that have cropped up over the years, and the penalty is mandatory— the stewards have no discretion in what penalty to apply.

      Either a reprimand or grid spot penalty would have been far more appropriate than being completely banned from qualifying.

      1. I wrote my reply but I should have read yours first. I agree.

      2. @grat Exactly.

      3. How do you know redbulls intentions?

        I dont care why someone ran a red light. We gotta stop people running redlights. Run a redlight , GET A TICKET. It doesnt matter if nobody was around.

        Stop breaking the rules redbull.

  2. Coming up next, on “Things that no one ever complained about until it happened to Horner”…

    If Friday is essential to the way the weekend goes for each team, setting up the car, and giving their drivers time to do simulations or whatever, I don’t understand why it should be independent, penalty wise, to qualifying and race. What are going to do next then? If a driver has a mechanical problem that prevents him to take part in a session, they are going to allow.him to run by himself.on Friday night?

    Rules are clear. Getting rid of them is not the solution…

    1. @fer-no65: Spot on.

      Rules are rules. Until they don’t work for Horner.

    2. Actually it might be to some degree. Its not quali or race. No advantage was gained in Friday practice. This rule is a hang over from when free practice could be used if quali was cancelled.

      1. Hornet bashing is more fun. Who wants a nuanced view when you have the opportunity to bash Horner.

      2. Croft, part of the process of setting the grid in the event of drivers getting a penalty does include having to take into account the times that the drivers have set in practise – it’s not just a hang over from previous times, the times that the drivers set in the practise sessions can, and still are, taken into consideration when setting the grid.

        1. So for the unicorn event – can’t even remember last time it happened – we get a daft penalty. If we need to cover cancelled quali apply that pen only if fp 2 times have to be used. Otherwise a lower pen applies. Plenty of far more dangerous things (speeding in pit lane) get a much lesser pen.

          Frankly teams aren’t delib running silly weights on the basis of a freak senario

          1. Croft, you have misunderstood the rule, and in fact it is far from “the unicorn event” you claim it is.

            For example, if a driver isn’t able to set a time in Q1, the stewards take into account his practise times when setting the grid, so we’ve actually seen it being invoked quite a few times in recent years – the 2018 British GP was one such example of that rule being invoked.

      3. It’s so easy to stop at the weight bridge, wait half a minute and carry on, too…

    3. @fer-no65 Who said anything about getting rid of the rule(s)?

      1. @robbie I correct myself. They want to get rid of the penalty. Or tweak it so it doesn’t affect the race. Which for me makes no sense, specially for something so harmless as a weight bridge call… just be more careful next time… They don’t need to get together, seek alternatives, vote for them, rewrite the rulebook or whatever for something like this.

    4. Another great post. Keep up the good work.

    5. Rules are clear. Getting rid of them is not the solution…

      Absolutely. Once a rule is passed in Formula One, it should never, ever be changed again. There’s no reason to ever revisit a rule to determine whether it’s still applicable to the sport.

  3. I think its clear from the various discussions within F1 on this subject since Baku is that the issue is the harsh nature of certain penalties. Pretending that the suggestion is that these penalties are done away completely is just a misrepresentation of the argument, and serves no purpose.

    1. Clearly a rule where being 0.01g over -v- 50kg over is the same penalty needs looking at.

      1. While I find myself agreeing @riptide, Croft, we should remember that at the start of these Fuel flow rules, the potential issues with the fuel flow meter, and margins for errors were actually discussed.

        Both ahead of the first race in 2014, and after, because a certain team got on the podium with a car that intentionally put the FIA procedure to the test. They lost.

        In the process, the answer to what margin for error was, was clarified to be: you and all other teams know the safe margin for the measurement, stay on the right side of that and you are clearly below the allowed fuel flow,as measured by the FIA mandated procedure.

        That worked for everyone, for five years, but now that same team, with a new engine manufacturer, finds itself again too close to the margin, so that a tow and vibrations were enough to bring them over the limit. I see some reasons for scepticism with respect to good faith.

      2. Croft, the fuel flow violation happened in qualifying, the weight bridge violation in Friday practice. A huge difference in my view.

      3. Kimi was penalized as his front wing failed deflection test by .5mm and we didnt hear him or the Sauber complain about the penalty. Also the friday penalty for Gasly is partly the RBRs fault as well. When he missed the initial stop at weighbridge Team had an option to push Gasly’s car back to weigh bridge from pit box instead they decided to bring him in garage. Time and Time again Horner and Marko have proved they are the worst whiners on grid best to neglected as far too often they are crying wolf.

        1. *5mm

        2. A illegal front wing can have an effect on your performance in qualifying and race, driving underweight in Friday practice does not.

  4. If you don’t want to get a penalty for something from a Friday session, then just don’t do anything that could get you a penalty. Simple.

    1. A very precise explanation of the problen!
      If you dump the penalties, we might as well get rid of the rules……

  5. GtisBetter (@)
    5th May 2019, 11:04

    I don’t think it can hurt to look at penalties from time to time, but this doesn’t strike me as one that need changing. It’s so simple, light goes on, you go to bridge. If you are busy with other things and forget to look, which can happen of course, you just take the penalty. I am sure Gasly will never forget to look at the light again and so the penalty has its intended effect.

    1. @passingisoverrated – good distinction. If anything, they could just review the procedures to see if there’s any communication gap between the FIA and teams that needs tightening up – maybe the pit wall is also instructed about the weight-call, maybe a light is used on the dash to indicate a weight-call, so as to take a bit of the cognitive load off the driver. But let the penalty for failing to heed the call remain as-is.

      1. But of course this is about the degree of penalty for the degree of disregard for the rule. If it is a simple mistake and the breach of the rule was minute and obviously not a blatant attempt to gain some big advantage with a cheat, should a tiny incident on Friday mean a spoiled whole weekend? There is a reason why most countries do not have a penalty of a hand being cut off for stealing an apple.

        1. @robbie – which is why I’d like to close off any communication gaps that might exist. A simple radio call from the FIA to the pit wall “your driver blew past the weigh bridge sign” could have had them wheeling the car back in short order, which wouldn’t have resulted in the penalty in the first place.

          Technical penalties* should be black or white, I don’t think we should consider the degree of violation while awarding a penalty. I don’t like the direction two of Horner’s recent statements have made – this one from today’s article, and an earlier one that Gasly’s fuel flow limit was exceeded by some small number. I don’t care if their car used 1 ml or 1 liter more: if it exceeded the limit, they get the same penalty. A wing is either in violation of a regulation or not, there are no shades of grey. A car either showed up for a weight-call, or it didn’t.

          Also, let’s not juxtapose technical penalties with civil/criminal punishments, they are quite different.

          *I contrast this with sporting penalties (e.g. related to driving standards), which should – and do – use the context around the penalty to influence the punishment.

          1. @phylyp Fair comment. Your first paragraph, I agree.

            But there is still the issue of the degree of penalty for the degree of ‘crime’ that you seem to want to ignore. 1 ml hints at an innocent oversight whereas 1litre hints at something more blatant that would make a performance difference and therefore could be seen as an attempt to get away with something. And that would require more investigation. A team is not likely to risk anything wrt 1ml, which would not make one iota of difference to their performance. So 1ml would likely be a silly error. 1 litre however would be truly suspect. Why penalize equally for both?

            There is such a thing as the degree of crime and therefore of the penalty. And all Horner is saying is perhaps some things that happen rather innocently on a Friday should not ruin a driver’s and a team’s whole weekend. He’s not saying they didn’t make an error, nor is he saying they shouldn’t have paid some penalty. Basically, the punishment needs to fit the crime. That’s why, for example, there are stewards there to adjudicate the many many nuances that can happen with any given pass attempt or attempt to defend.

          2. So 1ml would likely be a silly error. 1 litre however would be truly suspect

            @robbie – the reason I’m not in favour of scaling the penalty to the degree of violation is that its a slippery slope. If 1 ml is acceptable and doesn’t get penalized but 1 liter does, then where do we draw the line? 10 ml? Or would we make the penalty proportional to the degree of violation? That’s again tricky, because 10 ml extra fuel might make a difference in a run, but 1 liter of fuel carries its own weight penalty, and people will start gaming this system.

            My view is – if a team wants to run at the very edge of the envelope/regs, let them not moan if they’re caught out breaching that envelope. Want to play it safe? Duck below the limit and be confident of never being caught out.

            It’s in a way comparable to speedometer calibration for road cars – they’re often calibrated to show a slightly higher speed, to ensure that any variances in manufacturing the speedo will still ensure that a car isn’t exceeding the speed shown on the dial.

            To the point of stewards taking into account the nuances of an incident – I fully agree with that approach, but would keep that only for “sporting violations” like passing/defending, and not technical violations that are clearly spelt out.

          3. I completely agree with you @phylyp

          4. @phylyp But there can still be zero tolerance for the smallest of infractions, but just not have the smallest ones involve Sunday penalties. I haven’t suggested, nor has Horner, that there be no penalty for an infraction. Let the penalty be significant enough that it is best to obey the rules, as is done overwhelmingly the vast majority of the time, precisely because of penalties. But in the event a non-sinister infraction of small scale occurs, keep the penalty from that from affecting the race directly, in certain cases. As has been discussed and agreed by the teams, apparently.

            Perhaps a heavy fine in more cases, and a little less paying for an inconsequential infraction on Friday with a pit lane start on Sunday.

          5. I’m in agreement with @phylp on this one …. the rules and penalties are there for a reason, if they start watering them down for what is perceived as a small infraction of the rules, where do you draw the line to prevent intentional cheating.

          6. The line is already there. Doesn’t mean every punishment fits the crime.

  6. Bruno Verrari
    5th May 2019, 11:53

    100% right! Teams should be allowed to do any kind of tests on Fridays, including if that results in an underweight car during the Friday PRACTICE.

  7. I want to go the other way.
    All penalties have to be taken, if you can’t this race they roll over to the next race and the next etc.

  8. Something that seems to come up, pretty regularly, is the idea of getting rid of Friday Practice altogether. The regular cry from one side is …. “Look at how much money would be saved” and the other …. “The teams need testing time and the fans want to see cars on track”.
    The basic notion that Friday is a Test Day and in spite of some considerable effort to determine to the contrary, I can’t find info points being awarded for winning practice, why even police the cars on Fridays.? They are not under Parc Ferme rules, apart from the utilization of restricted components, tyres, gear boxes, control units etc. and the teams run different parts, sensors, cameras, wing-y aero bits, many of which would not be permitted in race-trim.
    Begs the question, the fact that the FIA is prepared to bin the idea of Friday Practice, why have the same level of technical scrutiny as you would expect for Qualifying and race-day.? Keep the safety policing as currently, but think how much money would be saved not having the FIA Technical Team on site for that extra day.

  9. F1oSaurus (@)
    5th May 2019, 19:35

    It’s always the same with Horner. I remember the outcry from Horner when they were getting penalized for unsafe releases and also when they were getting penalized for sending away a car with the tyres not fitted properly.

    All supposedly minor infractions that should not be penalized. Or not so overly harsh. Yet for some reason those infractions rarely happen anymore. Amazingly, it seems like these penalties helped Red Bull see the light that they needed to adjust their procedures to make sure these trivial mistakes are prevented.

    Which is exactly the point.

    1. Nope, the point is during a practice session on Friday penaltys should have no influence on the race.

      1. Exactly. And unsafe releases and tires improperly put on are not what I would call minor, nor have the penalties for those infractions prevented those infractions from happening several times a season throughout all the teams.

        1. F1oSaurus (@)
          6th May 2019, 17:44

          @robbie At the time almost every race there was an unsafe release and or wheels coming off. Especially Red Bull had it happening a lot. Several races in succession. Then they started complaining about how unfair it was and then these incidents stopped happening.

          Red Bull just need to learn that when they start crying, they should fix their own faults.

      2. F1oSaurus (@)
        6th May 2019, 17:41

        erikje No they should.

  10. If all the teams want the rules changed why is it Horner is the only one saying so …. or maybe I am just being cynical given his history for complaining.

    1. ‘All the teams’ don’t want the ‘rules changed’. Nobody said that. The are agreeing to address the punishment for some minor infractions as the whether the punishment for something minor, committed on Friday in practice, should affect the whole rest of the weekend, particularly on race day.

      1. F1oSaurus (@)
        6th May 2019, 17:46

        @robbie You really should stop twisting people’s words. Or perhaps learn/try to comprehend what you are reading.

        How ever many teams Horner refers too, NONE of them have come out and said anything.

        The rules are the rules. If Horner doesn’t want to be penalized he should make sure his team doesn’t break them. If he feels the rules are unfair, he should have addressed this up front.

        1. @f1osaurus He’s addressing them up front, ahead of the new chapter that is about to be started in earnest under Liberty with the reg changes for 2021 that will soon be determined.

          And getting back to twisting words, why are you taking about him having a problem with the rules being unfair when it is the penalty he is talking about? He hasn’t said there shouldn’t be rules, whatever one(s) we might be talking about. He hasn’t even said there should be no punishment for any given rule one wants to address. Why can’t you get that? It’s about some penalties some times. It’s right there in the headline to this article. And you think I have a comprehension problem? Please. I’ll not be back to read your childish response.

          1. F1oSaurus (@)
            7th May 2019, 6:55

            @robbie No he’s NOT. He’s complaining about it AFTER they incurred a penalty for not paying attention. Again!

            Also basically he IS saying that he doesn’t want any penalties for breaking the rules. On Friday.

            I’ll not be back to read your childish response.

            Why do you post such ill thought out nonsense then? You are the one who is being naive/childish. Just think before you blurt out nonsense.

            How on earth is this going to work? No Penalties on Friday at all? No you say, that’s not the goel. So just not for specific rules? Which specific rules then? They would need to write a special rile book for stating what will be allowed on Friday.

  11. Pjotr (@pietkoster)
    6th May 2019, 12:27

    Penalties for these mistakes during practise is another example how stupid and boring F1 actually is.

    1. And you are yet another so called fan that complains the sport is stupid and boring …. but you continue to watch and complain … strange.

Comments are closed.