Carlos Sainz Jnr, Ferrari, Shanghai International Circuit, 2024

Alonso and Sainz incidents prompt changes to Formula 1’s rules

Formula 1

Posted on

| Written by

Formula 1 has revised its regulations following incidents involving Fernando Alonso and Carlos Sainz Jnr earlier this year.

The two cases occured during the Chinese Grand Prix weekend in April. The first followed Fernando Alonso’s clash with Sainz during the sprint race.

Alonso was given a 10-second time penalty for the incident. The sanction made no difference to his finishing position as he retired from the race.

Drivers who incur penalties then retire from races are ordinarily given grid drops for subsequent rounds, as happened to Esteban Ocon in Monaco this year. However Alonso’s incident occured in a sprint race and F1’s rules did not allow his penalty to be adjusted in this way.

The stewards noted this flaw in the regulations at the time. “We note that the language in the regulations as to when a car has retired and the resultant consequences on penalties that may be imposed or served, especially when that car is otherwise classified, is somewhat unclear and we would recommend that the FIA considers making the necessary amendments to bring greater clarity to this issue,” they wrote when explaining Alonso’s penalty.

This has been addressed in an update to the Sporting Regulations published today. A revised clause now states: “If any of [above] penalties above are imposed upon a driver, and that driver is unable to serve the penalty due to being unclassified in the sprint session or the race in the case of a) or b) or due to retirement from the sprint session or the race in the case of c) or d), the stewards may impose a grid place penalty on the driver at their next race.”

Aston Martin were dissatisfied with Alonso’s penalty and later tried, unsuccessfully, to have it overturned. They also raised a protest after Sainz crashed later that day during the qualifying session for the grand prix. The session was red-flagged but Sainz was able to drive his car away and continue.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Aston Martin protested the results of qualifying, arguing Sainz should not have been allowed to continue under the rule which states: “Any driver whose car stops on the track during the qualifying session or the sprint qualifying will not be permitted to take any further part in that session.” They were also unsuccessful on this occasion, but the stewards have now revised the rule in question.

It now states: “Any driver whose car stops in any area other than the pit lane during the qualifying session or the sprint qualifying session and receives physical assistance will not be permitted to take any further part in that session.”

As Sainz did not receive physical assistance when he rejoined the track, his actions would also have been legal under the revised regulation.

In a further alteration to the rules, a new clause has been added defining a procedure for stopping a race when the pit entrance is blocked, meaning drivers cannot enter the pit lane as usual.

“In exceptional circumstances, for reasons of safety the pit entry may be closed before cars have returned to the pit lane,” it states. “In such circumstances all cars must proceed slowly to the starting grid, the first car to arrive on the grid should occupy pole position and others should fill the remaining grid positions in the order they arrive. The remainder of the procedures detailed in Articles 57.3, 57.4, 57.5 and 58 shall remain unchanged, but will be conducted on the grid instead of in the fast lane.”

The FIA World Motorsport Council also rubber-stamped other updates to the regulations including new rules allowing teams to test ‘mule cars’ to prepare for 2026.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Miss nothing from RaceFans

Get a daily email with all our latest stories - and nothing else. No marketing, no ads. Sign up here:

Formula 1

Browse all Formula 1 articles

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

20 comments on “Alonso and Sainz incidents prompt changes to Formula 1’s rules”

  1. No mention of how ridiculous that penalty for Alonso was. That’s probably the bit that needs fixing the most…

    1. One of the worst penalties I’ve ever seen. It’s the type of thing I wouldn’t even have expected to be investigated.

      IDK why it just popped into my mind, but another penalty that always annoyed me was one Perez got in Spa about 6-7 years against Grosjean during an incident at Les Combes. Another terrible one.

    2. An Sionnach
      1st August 2024, 1:06

      It must have deeply hurt the stewards that the rulebook forbade them from further penalising Alonso. I’m not sure we should allow sprint penalties to affect a race. Sprints are a joke and races aren’t.

      1. I heard Herbert was furious. He tried to storm the Chinese stewards’ room.

    3. the FIA can’t help themselves, they just compound misery and stupidity in their stewarding. Ban the FIA, then you might actually see some good racing and not tire manipulation in order to generate ‘different winners’ and championship narratives/plots. The racing in F1 is so rigged right now, its the only thing keeping it sustainable. It sure isn’t innovation or performance.

      1. Coventry Climax
        1st August 2024, 11:22

        Standing ovation.

        1. [applause grows]

  2. Coventry Climax
    31st July 2024, 19:34

    the stewards may impose a grid place penalty on the driver at their next race.”

    Brilliant and unclear again. Define race, FiA.
    And obviously, No, it’s not from what color parents you were born.

    Not too long ago, these sprint thingies weren’t even called races by the FiA themselves. That changed in the mean time?
    By my book, they’re still separate things; fake and real.

    But does this also mean a penalty incurred at a sprint ‘race’, can be applied to a subsequent real Grand Prix? Or vice versa, incurred at a Grand Prix, but then applied for a sprint thingie?
    The latter seems to be way much less serious, in my opinion.

    To be continued, I’m sure. Amateurs.

    1. Mmm, on one hand if you get a grid penalty applied to the sprint, you’re less likely to recover since 1\3 distance and no pit stops to shake the order, but on other hand there’s less points in order, I think it balances out a bit, because with a good car you would recover more positions in a full race.

      1. Coventry Climax
        1st August 2024, 11:28

        And that’s exactly where the fairness is at stake: “with a good car”.

        Also, drivers know when the next small prix are. That might create a mindset where they take more risk at one event over another, just because they know where a possible penalty will have to be taken.

    2. less points on offer*

  3. I luv chocken
    31st July 2024, 19:52

    They make these stupid adjustments to the rules, and then go off for dinner, brandies, and to the bank to cash their cheques. Fire all of them. Why is it that most steward rulings, when viewed by outside common folk, seem totally rediculous.

    1. Because they’ve got a lot of clowns running the show.

      1. pretty much.

  4. I’m really suspicious of these 1’0s becomes a grid drop’ penalty. Similar to Perez in Canada, if the stewards issue the penalty in a timely manner surely the teams will just send the car out to be classified by doing one lap and serve the penalty.

    I’ve never felt the ‘penalty next time out’ was any form of deterrent – is any driver avoiding a move at Les Combes in case they get a grid drop in Zandvoort? By all means penalise a driver if he ruins anothe’rs race but why impact the next one if he also gained no advantage?

    As for the Sainz penalty, they haven’t solutioned that at all. In both cases they’ve made rules when best practice would be to review whether a) the contact was a penalty and b) a red flag needed to be flown. As I stated at the time, I felt both decisions were farcical – the review of that should be changes to the stewarding framework not the ruleset.

    1. Farcical to the extreme. It’s ironic the only times they’re slow to trigger the red flag is when a car is upside in the middle of a corner or other circumstances show a red flag is inevitable.

      I wonder if F1 will ever revert to sanity and stop treating every car retrieval as requiring a VSC or SC.

      1. Indeed, they always go on about safety “we can’t race in the rain cause it’s dangerous”, but when there’s a car stopped on the racing line is the time they take their time before neutralising the race.

      2. they might as well just get rid of the yellow flag.

        1. But yellow is the color of their bellies. They wouldn’t dare.

    2. One lap is not sufficient to be qualified. You can finish a race and not qualify if you’ve been lapped enough times.

Comments are closed.