Oscar Piastri revised his opinion of his sprint race penalty after seeing how the stewards responded to Sunday’s controversial incident between his team mate and Max Verstappen.
Lando Norris was given a five-second time penalty for overtaking Verstappen after the Red Bull went off at turn 12 and forced the McLaren driver wide on his outside.Piastri also received a five-second time penalty after he passed Pierre Gasly on the inside of the same corner in the sprint race and forced his rival off the track. Before the grand prix Piastri said he “probably deserved” the penalty, but afterwards he struggled to reconcile it with how the stewards reacted to his team mate’s incident.
Asked whether drivers have enough clarity over how penalties are awarded, Piastri said: “Given those incidents were so similar with opposite penalties, probably not.
“It’s very, very difficult, especially when you’ve got a car on the outside and both cars going off the track and stuff like that. So it’s not an easy thing to decide. The difference of 20 or 30 centimetres being alongside can make a massive difference.”
Piastri confirmed his team advised him to back off in case Norris was penalised. “They told me to slow down a bit on the last lap, which is fair to me,” he said.
“I’ve seen the incident a bit and it’s pretty harsh, I would say, considering I had a very similar incident yesterday in Max’s position and I was the one that got a penalty. So I’m sure we’ll have some questions about that.”
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
The McLaren driver wasn’t the only one to query his penalty. The Ferrari pair thought it was excessive.
“There was an example yesterday with Oscar’s overtake. That for me was completely fine and very similar to anything that we’ve done between each other on the sprint. And I felt like the penalty on Oscar yesterday was really, really harsh and didn’t go along with some guidelines that I thought were the way they were. So that penalty surprised me yesterday.”
Charles Leclerc agreed Piastri’s penalty was “a bit too harsh.”
“However, on the rules, I think they are clear,” he continued. “Sometimes the interpretation of the rule can be a little bit different because it will be impossible to have a rule book that takes every single scenario.
“Every scenario is different, has its particularity, and you’ve got to analyse it in a different way and interpret the rules in some ways for particular scenarios, which is what the FIA is trying to do best. However, sometimes we disagree, and I think on the one of yesterday, it’s something that we’ll probably talk of in the next driver briefing.”
Miss nothing from RaceFans
Get a daily email with all our latest stories - and nothing else. No marketing, no ads. Sign up here:
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
2024 United States Grand Prix
- McLaren insist stewards made ‘provable error’ after losing bid for review of Norris’ penalty
- Why McLaren’s focus on Verstappen’s driving failed to overturn Norris’ penalty
- Stewards reject McLaren’s request to review Norris’ United States GP penalty
- McLaren know Norris’ penalty is likely to stand – so what do they hope to gain?
- McLaren request review of Norris’ penalty for off-track pass on Verstappen
Mayrton
21st October 2024, 13:52
McLaren needs to stop complaining and have more focus on themselves The pressure of Ferrari getting them in the WCC seems to trigger cracks, especially now they do not have their wing advantage anymore. I hope they sort out their challenges and become a serious competitor next season.
Kevin C (@kev-f1)
21st October 2024, 14:38
What like Red Bull that doesn’t have it’s brake bias valve advantage any more!! lol
Osnola
22nd October 2024, 7:32
You do know that option never was used according to fia.
On the other hand mcl drove an illegal car for several races according to Tombazis.
Mayrton
22nd October 2024, 7:45
And Ferrari had fuel flow issues, Mercedes had their illegal wings, das, engine regulation misuse and tire lobby.. they all have some from time to time.. that’s not the point…I was talking about McLaren. I am a huge fan of the team and would love to see them up their game to become a serious contender. Their thinking needs to improve as there were too many tactical mistakes so far this season. But I am sure they will get there, maybe they need to change a few key figures to achieve it though.
Jonathan Parkin
22nd October 2024, 9:49
No they don’t need to change anybody. They just need experience. The team hasn’t fought for a championship since 2012, and this group of people hasn’t fought at the sharp end. They will make mistakes, but as long as they realise them, and don’t make them again they will be fine.
Besides Ron Dennis wasn’t above the odd strategic clanger. At Monaco in 1996, he pitted Mika Hakkinen for slicks before David Coulthard despite DC being ahead of Mika on the track. The result was DC was overtaken by the eventual winner Olivier Panis
Mayrton
24th October 2024, 9:19
Well it is hard to argue Stella is a contribution to the team isn’t it? I think replacing him is the final step they need to make to become a serious contender. The team needs a cool and down to earth pragmatic leader.
Jere (@jerejj)
21st October 2024, 15:32
I’d briefly forgotten how similar Piastri’s sprint situation was, so I didn’t consider it yesterday when making the comparison I did.
MazdaChris (@mazdachris)
21st October 2024, 16:31
I think in some respects, while I can completely understand it, there’s maybe too much emphasis on nuance in the interpretation of the rules.
The situation you have currently is that if driver A forces driver B off the track, it’s almost impossible to predict whether driver A will likely face a punishment for it. Sometimes they do, sometimes they don’t. The rule itself – or at least the bit of it which we get to see on the screen – appears fairly clear cut. Penalty applied for forcing another driver off the circuit. But the interpretation allows for a huge variation in how this is interpreted or applied in any given circumstance.
You have to ask; at its core, why does this rule exist? And the answer, I think, is to ensure that the racing is fair, sporting, and safe. It exists because, on a fairly fundamental level, you don’t want drivers regularly running other drivers off the circuit because it’s unsporting and potentially dangerous. But the way in which the rule is currently being applied doesn’t achieve this aim – there’s enough ambiguity that a driver with the opportunity to force another driver off the circuit isn’t really dissuaded from doing it. Because there’s a decent chance they’ll get away with it, or at least that any penalty they get may be negated by the advantage they get from doing it in the first place.
I think it would be far better for the sport as a whole if there was far less emphasis placed on the specific circumstance of the incident. Did driver A force driver B to go off the track? Yes? Then driver A gets a penalty. Doesn’t matter if it was lap 1, the last lap, whether they’re fighting for the lead or fighting over last place. Doesn’t matter whether the penalty is likely to impact the championship. Just let the drivers know that if you push another driver off the circuit, then you’re almost guaranteed to get a penalty. Then watch how often it happens. Because as the moment it’s happening lots of times in every race, and for my money, it’s bad driving and puts F1 into a pretty negative light.
MichaelN
21st October 2024, 19:46
The rule is not really being applied, it’s rather overwritten by the ‘Overtaking Guidelines’ which the F1 race director has come up with and uses as a self-invented alternative set of rules. Note how this document is being kept private (!) while all real rules are freely available on the FIA website.
Some people have seen said document, and the stewards have at times made reference to it, which is where the whole ‘the front axle has to be alongside the front axle of the other car at the apex’ silliness comes from. Note that this is not in any real rule.
The real rule is actually very simple: don’t force someone off. If someone is on the outside, leave room for them. Simple. That means a driver has to brake a bit more. Also simple. It’s not like these guys don’t understand any of that. They’re just so used to running people off that even Russell, who in his role at the GPDA should know better, incorrectly claimed that this is normal racing – I believe his words were along the lines of ‘since karting’ – back when he and Verstappen had their little squabble in Baku last year. Which is obviously not true, as these antics are very much not welcomed in karting due to the nature of both the karts and the tracks they race on.
Again, these are all excellent – almost impossibly good – drivers. They are doing this on purpose.
Ludewig
24th October 2024, 10:23
That’s not really simple, because the outside driver can also choose to back off. In many cases, getting ‘forced off’ is due to that driver pushing for a gap that is inevitably going to close.
Stoo
22nd October 2024, 15:54
+1 ….. it seems that the penalties are awarded purely by the “Judge of the Day and whichever Driver is on the receiving end”.
A bit like the way Penalties were awarded to MV and LH in years gone by – one rule for one, and one rule for another !
Alex
21st October 2024, 16:55
Somebody has not been reading the rules…
It is unconceavable that a driver, even a young, unexperienced racer does not know what is within the rules. This is the difference between a good and a genius driver. The latter read, understood and exploited the limits of what is permitted or not.
Davethechicken
21st October 2024, 20:48
So in Silverstone 2021 it would have been “genius” for Lewis not to brake, thus being in front at the apex, and injure Max fairly? In fact would have been Max’s own fault?
Genius I think not. The rule is flawed or the interpretation is flawed. It isn’t “genius” to drive other drivers off track.
Alex
21st October 2024, 21:36
Lewis was not in front back then. Actually, he was way behind and hit Max on the rear axle. That was murder attempt and it was not legal. It should be written that drivers should not try to kill other drivers just for the cheering of the insane crowd.
David
21st October 2024, 21:51
He was pretty much level until he backed out of it, if he hadn’t backed out it’s quite likely he would have been ahead at the apex, but the extra speed would have caused him to run wide. Oh.
Davethechicken
22nd October 2024, 7:01
Alex,.you just argued it was *genius* to miss the apex, run off the track at corner exit and force the outside driver off track by simply deliberately not braking in time.
In your own words it was “genius”, now you say it is attempting murder? Make up your mind….
Mayrton
24th October 2024, 9:22
Silverstone ’21 was one of the most if not most vicious actions ever seen in F1. There is just no coming back from it, as Lewis never did in fact.
Coventry Climax
22nd October 2024, 13:22
There’s speed traps, right?
So it is not impossible to measure speed at certain points on the track.
Measure with what speed drivers are approaching corners, and you’ll know whether they are able to make the corner or are just trying to stay/get ahead and/or run off an opponent.
Sure there’s a certain margin where tyre management is involved, but I’m sure that can be calculated into the data, using qualifying figures.
Get professional about it and police it based on data instead of on opinions please. Especially when there’s different people to jury, judge and condemn it all on different tracks, using a lawbook that’s worded as unclear as a foggy autumn early sunday morning.