If McLaren successfully overturns the five-second time penalty the stewards handed Lando Norris at the end of last weekend’s United States Grand Prix it will provide a useful boost to his championship hopes.
The penalty promoted Norris’ championship rival Max Verstappen to third in his place, resulting in a six-point swing. Reverse that and Norris’ deficit falls from 57 points to 51.But do McLaren seriously expect to persuade the stewards that Norris did not deserve a penalty for overtaking Verstappen off-track at turn 12 on lap 52 last weekend? Recent history suggests they shouldn’t.
The team has submitted a Right of Review request. This is a notoriously high bar to clear: Any team attempting it essentially needs to win twice in order to have any chance of achieving the outcome they’re looking for.
In a dozen such cases held over the last five years, the success rate among teams who appealed was one in four. Many of those who tried and failed fell at the first hurdle – proving they had pertinent new evidence.
Speaking to media at the Circuit of the Americas shortly after the penalty was issued, McLaren team principal Andrea Stella admitted McLaren’s chances of meeting this standard were not good.
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
| Date of decision | Team | Event | Incident | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 21 June 2019 | Ferrari | Canadian GP | Sebastian Vettel rejoined the track in an unsafe fashion | Failed |
| 5 July 2020 | Red Bull | Austrian GP | Lewis Hamilton failed to slow for yellow flags | Succeeded |
| 2 May 2021 | Alfa Romeo | Emilia Romagna GP | Kimi Raikkonen failed to re-establish the correct restart order | Failed |
| 29 July 2021 | Red Bull | British GP | Lewis Hamilton given a 10-second penalty for colliding with Max Verstappen | Failed |
| 9 August 2021 | Aston Martin | Hungarian GP | Sebastian Vettel’s car disqualified for being underweight | Failed |
| 19 November 2021 | Mercedes | Brazilian GP | Max Verstappen forced Lewis Hamilton off the track | Failed |
| 28 October 2022 | Alpine | United States GP | Haas submitted protest against Fernando Alonso too late | Succeeded |
| 19 March 2023 | Aston Martin | Saudi Arabian GP | Fernando Alonso failed to serve a five-second time penalty correctly | Succeeded |
| 18 April 2023 | Ferrari | Australian GP | Carlos Sainz Jnr collided with Fernando Alonso | Failed |
| 2 July 2023 | McLaren | Canadian GP | Lando Norris penalised for unsportsmanlike driving | Failed |
| 9 November 2023 | Haas | United States GP | Track limits breaches | Failed |
| 5 May 2024 | Aston Martin | Chinese GP | Fernando Alonso collided with Carlos Sainz Jnr | Failed |
What new evidence might McLaren have, and how likely is it to produce the desired outcome? New video evidence is unlikely to sway the stewards in this particularly case.
As Norris told media at the Autodromo Hermanos Rodriguez on Thursday, McLaren’s objection to the penalty focuses on Verstappen’s lunging move down the inside of the corner after his rival nosed ahead of him. Verstappen ran off the track, taking Norris with him. Crucially, Verstappen’s late marking move meant he reached the apex of the corner before Norris, therefore earning him the ‘right’ to the corner in the eyes of the stewards, irrespective of the fact he then went off.
When Verstappen did much the same to Hamilton at Interlagos’ Subida do Lago in 2021, Mercedes requested a Right of Review hearing. Their case rested on new video of the incident which appeared after the stewards made their decision, specifically the forward-facing camera from Verstappen’s car.
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
This footage showed more clearly how far behind his rival Verstappen had been before diving into the corner and running wide, forcing Hamilton off as he did. The stewards were unmoved, however, insisting it added nothing new to their assessment of Verstappen’s driving.
True, Red Bull used previously unavailable 360-degree camera video to win a Right of Review request in 2020. However that was able to show Hamilton had passed a yellow flag which wasn’t visible from other angles, and as in 2021 it’s doubtful such footage could reveal something not previously apparent in this case.
When teams have successfully persuaded the stewards to review their case, even if they have not subsequently gone on to win it (as happened to Alfa Romeo in 2021), the new evidence in question has usually not involved footage but documents relating to the rules, or discussions regarding their interpretation. Here we can only speculate what McLaren could intend to present.
Perhaps they believe drivers have been told on some past occasion, such as in a meeting with the race director, that this kind of defensive move would not be allowed following the Interlagos 2021 episode. As McLaren pointed out last week, the stewards made their decision in a hurry, and may have overlooked some relevant past decision or precedent.
It’s probably more likely that McLaren regard their chances of victory as slim, but want to exert every last iota of pressure upon Red Bull given the championship situation. The two teams have already had a tit-for-tat over the technical rules – ther MCL38’s rear wing, the RB20’s front bib device – now McLaren want to put the spotlight on Verstappen’s defending.
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
Hamilton is among those who believes the time has come to outlaw such defensive moves. “It’s interesting people are talking about it now because it’s the same thing that happened to me in 2021 if you take Brazil into account, for example,” he told Sky.
Friday’s hearing will take place shortly before the drivers’ briefing at which the subject of last week’s penalties – Norris’ plus four others – are expected to be discussed. Several drivers have already expressed the view Verstappen’s ‘divebomb defence’ should not be allowed.
As Norris observed on Thursday, his points deficit to Verstappen means the championship leader can afford to take far greater risks when they fight, knowing a race-ending collision hurts the hunter more than the hunted. So if McLaren lose their case over Austin, but apply enough pressure to win the wider argument to outlaw Verstappen’s trademark move, they will surely still be satisfied.
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
Johnny
25th October 2024, 3:07
When will teams get it through their thick heads? Verstappen has his own set of rules in the sport because of …unknown reasons, but the guy has had more ref looking the other way calls than a WWF match.
w0o0dy (@w0o0dy)
25th October 2024, 7:13
That”s BS. Max has been on the receiving end of stewards penalties quite a bit. It’s like he said… Know the rules and exploit them as much as they allow. And accept the fact that sometimes you’re judgement is different than the stewards and you end up getting a penalty, or lose a position.
It’s racing, he knows the rules and slushes every bit of room for interpretation there is. If others don’t or don’t want to? Their loss and shut up about it.
w0o0dy (@w0o0dy)
25th October 2024, 7:13
Slushes???? Uses! Stupid autocorrect
Adrian Hancox (@ahxshades)
25th October 2024, 11:42
In this case – slushes kinda works too :)
Esploratore (@esploratore1)
25th October 2024, 11:45
Ahah, I didn’t even know that word before!
Mayrton
25th October 2024, 7:25
I totally agree. It is quite childish to bring Verstappen into this. Complaints should be directed at the FIA and their current regulatory framework. Has nothing to do with a single driver. Drivers just operate within or on the edge of what is being presented to them.
Captain_Slow
25th October 2024, 12:49
Indeed complaints should be made to the FIA, but not due to the current regulatory framework, but the inconsistent application of it.
The inconsistent application seem to favour certain drivers.
Mayrton
25th October 2024, 14:58
My experience is that it goes all ways and is perceived as impartial depending looking though fanboy glasses. I am pretty confident in the end, over time, it evens out across the driver line-up. Sometimes a driver benefits, sometimes he is the victim.
Johnny
25th October 2024, 15:02
Don’t be talking reality, it’s not the current fashion. So thank you @Captain_Slow, you’re eloquence has shown a spotlight on the flaw of my original comment. Verstappen is the symptom, not the cause.
drmouse (@drmouse)
25th October 2024, 18:07
Of course it isn’t childish to blame Verstappen, at least in part. He’s the only one who uses this “technique”, and it’s unsportsmanlike at best. It’s ridiculous that the officials keep letting him get away with it, especially after they said it would be outlawed after Brazil 2021, but that doesn’t absolve him of any responsibility.
Doh
25th October 2024, 21:08
It has everything to do with one driver. It’s been going on for years and is still an issue because it wasn’t nipped in the bud back then! He’s been doing even before the brainrot “ahead at apex” rule
JackL
25th October 2024, 16:14
That’s a really flawed argument. That he knows the rules and pushes them to their very extreme but stays just in the grey area so he cant be penalized. This is from the Schumi school of driving which horribly tarnished his reputation and legacy. Every driver knows the spirit and intent of the rules. Drivers like Moss and Clark and Fangio and Stewart are regarded as the greats because they didnt lower themselves to this sort of nonsense.
If someone behaved like this in literally any other profession, theyd be fired and possibly prosecuted. I should point out, that this was literally what was going on in the world of finance pre-2008. And we saw how that ended. Just because you can, doesnt mean you should.
And it wasnt even necessary. His points lead still wouldve been over 2 race victories.
The best way to solve this is the Fernando Alonso rule (as he shouted in Monza 2011): All the time you have to leave a space. Attacking or defending, at the apex or exit, ahead or level, it doesnt matter, ALL THE TIME YOU HAVE TO LEAVE A SPACE.
PeteB (@peteb)
25th October 2024, 18:26
Every driver knows the spirit and intent of the rules but why should they care about that? Mercedes knew the spirit and intent of the rules meant DAS wasn’t supposed to happen but they pushed the rules to the limit and got away with it. The same applies to most of the tricks the teams think up. Finding loopholes in the rules is what F1 is all about!
SteveP
25th October 2024, 22:38
Your whataboutism has slipped a cog.
The discussion is about driving standards, which apparently aren’t standard in that different drivers seem to get different treatment. Mercedes has nothing to do with any of this – plus DAS was perfectly OK, but ruled out for following seasons because other teams whinged it would cost too much to reverse engineer and replicate. Note, not illegal, just expensive to replicate.
On topic: The headline asks what McLaren hope to gain.
I would suggest that they aim to codify/standardise what is and what is not permitted so that their drivers can drive to that codified limit without penalty.
Mayrton
26th October 2024, 8:10
Hahaha, this Netflix generation is hilarious.
oweng (@oweng)
25th October 2024, 6:39
If you’re defending on the inside then you should have to leave room on the outside of the corner for someone attempting an overtake. Just like if you’re overtaking on the inside you have to leave room for the car on the outside or else you’re classed as forcing the other car off track.
w0o0dy (@w0o0dy)
25th October 2024, 7:07
Problem here is… Was Max defending or attacking? First Norris was ahead, then Max gained position at the end of the braking zone, just before the apex. Is he still defending or is that an attack and was he ahead again?
Maybe the rules need simplicity most.. on the inside, you must stay within the white lines, on the outside you cannot overtake off track. You must avoid contact if possible. In an uninterrupted sequence of corners the car in front into the first corner is protected against forcing off track untill the last corner of the uninterrupted sequence. Done.
theRealMax (@millionus)
25th October 2024, 8:03
This is a good point @w0o0dy, did his defense at some point, or are you always the same actor from start to finish.
Alberto
25th October 2024, 9:15
It doesn’t really matter in my opinion whether he is attacking or defending. In both cases if you are pushing people off the track to gain an advantage you should be penalised. If there was a gravel trap on the outside and Max did the same defending he would have gotten a penalty, these rule set shouldn’t be any different in COTA. To your point Norris’ car was ahead of Max at some point on the straight before the corner so, if Max is attacking then Piastri and Russell got a 5s penalty for doing what he did.
w0o0dy (@w0o0dy)
25th October 2024, 9:27
No because it is in the rules the whoever is ahead AT the apex dictates the corner.
If you choose to go around the outside but the inside gets blocked that’s a YOU problem not for the driver on the inside. THAT is why the rules are like they are.
However… There is logic in expecting a penalty for Max leaving the track while defending… BUT THAT IS NOT IN THE RULES!
Ludewig
25th October 2024, 10:05
@w0o0dy
It is in the rules that only a very limited number of excursions are allowed, so Lando could have tried to put pressure on Max to get him to leave the track, while Lando kept it within the lines.
Captain_Slow
25th October 2024, 12:57
Sorry w0o0dy, but it is well described in the rules and you can find several steward decisions throughout the season for “Leaving the track and gaining a lasting advantage.”
This applies to going outside track limits defending and even in some cases forcing the other car off track as well.
That type of manoeuvre is considered a breach of Article 33.3 of the FIA Formula One Sporting Regulations and gives 10 seconds time penalty.
AlanD
25th October 2024, 17:04
Woody: “No because it is in the rules the whoever is ahead AT the apex dictates the corner.”
I don’t believe that is the case. I’ve looked through all the published rules and regulations and nowhere does it cover this at all, but I am very happy to be proved wrong if someone can find the exact rule that applies. There is also a document called Driving Standards Guidelines which seems to be updated from race to race to take account of the quirks of each circuit, but it states at the top of that document that these are not rules, just guidelines for the stewards to interpret as they wish, and even in there I couldn’t find anything specifically saying the apex was the judgement point. However, since the FIA doesn’t routinely make those documents public, I’ve no idea if the current ones specify apex. The ones I found said drivers have to leave room if another car is “substantially alongside”.
kcrossle (@kcrossle)
26th October 2024, 2:59
“At the apex”. With Max, though, it’s a shifting apex. Goes right up to and sails way past any normal apex.
notagrumpyfan
25th October 2024, 9:40
That’s actually quite simple to answer: Verstappen was still defending.
An overtake is only considered completed when the attacker is fully ahead (on track/racing line) of the other car.
Ryan Butler
25th October 2024, 15:14
But he was completely ahead before the braking zone. The only reason Max was ahead at the Apex was due to super late braking which ran him out of road. As Lando was ahead, Max becomes the attacking driver and the rules are clear, you cannot complete the move by forcing someone off the track. At this point, Lando was merely maintaining position.
Michael (@freelittlebirds)
25th October 2024, 18:54
@w0o0dy sorry but you’re essentially rationalizing everything to make sure that Max can do whatever he wants. And we’re okay with that. But can he leave F1 and go do it on his own somewhere else? If he’s above the rules and should be marginally penalized he should find another sport where he can rule supreme without rules.
If you were to bring a completely independent set of judges who don’t know about anything F1 and gave them the rulebook and asked for the top 5 drivers who deserved a race ban the answers would most likely be:
1. Max Verstappen
2. Max Verstappen
3. Max Verstappen
4. Max Verstappen
5. Michael Schumacher
It’s absurd to watch F1 – Max Verstappen has more plot protection than 007 in movies. It’s comical. They penalize every driver for the same exact thing as Max every time but he gets away with it and worse the other driver gets penalized. It’s almost as if the stewards realize that the offense deserves punishment and they go find an innocent victim like you watch in movies.
It’s been going on forever too…
Neil (@neilosjames)
25th October 2024, 6:41
I like to think that even if it won’t lead to an overturning of this penalty, it’ll at least add to the pressure for this particular ‘rule’ to be looked at.
I do think forcing a rival off the track at the exit if your front axel is ahead at the apex is fine. But if you don’t yourself make the corner because the only reason your front axel was ahead is because you braked too late, for me that’s still forcing a rival off and any penalties should be coming your way, not to the other driver.
Unless McLaren can somehow argue Norris was the defending driver, as he was ahead into braking, and that he therefore didn’t gain or maintain any advantage due to both cars leaving the track and emerging in the same order as they were pre-braking.
w0o0dy (@w0o0dy)
25th October 2024, 6:57
Max said it very well himself: ““I don’t understand why suddenly now we need to ask and scream for changes in the regulation when it’s been like that forever. I grew up go-karting, F3, F1, you know that you cannot pass outside of the white line. It’s as simple as that.”
And:
“It’s how the rules are written. I didn’t make the rules, first of all, I just follow the rules as much as I can. Of course, sometimes you get caught out with it, we’ve had that in the past. I just implement the rules and play with them”
He added: “Sometimes you say it’s too many rules, then it’s like ‘we need more rules’ – you’ll always have that. Depends on whatever side you’re on.”
Hit the nail on the head.
Mayrton
25th October 2024, 7:33
Exactly, I even imagine when running into Lando Max would state: “hey sorry mate, I actually agree it is a rule up for evaluation, but this is what it is right now”. I hope Lando then learns from that approach and attitude.
An Sionnach
25th October 2024, 13:13
Yes, this is correct. Since the rule is that drivers must be afforded space if they’re ahead at the apex, then it does come into question what happens when the driver in front manages this, but only because they run off the track. They should be able to use the full width of the road if they are ahead. Is a track limits strike for this fair, or should there be more of a deterrent? The goal of a rule change shouldn’t be to make it impossible to defend, but there seems to be a problem with fairness here.
Some ideas:
* If you run out of bounds when defending like this, your opponent will not be noted for a track limits violation. They do not deserve space, but this was because it was questionable as to whether being ahead at the apex was achieved fairly.
* You get two strikes for track limits if done so in this circumstance.
* A slowing surface should be present off track to make it disadvantageous if you go off.
* If the pursuing driver overtakes off the track and doesn’t give back the position, they get a penalty. Sorry, Lando.
An Sionnach
25th October 2024, 13:54
Too many rules, perhaps? It’s hard to think of a simpler solution that’s fair to all. Full gravel can mean someone ends up out of the race due to foul play. A black flag could be used in some circumstances, but in this one, both drivers got it slightly wrong until Lando overtook off track, which I don’t think can ever be permitted.
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
25th October 2024, 7:04
It’s fairly straightforward: McLaren hopes to change the debate on the current and future interpretations of this regulation in their favour, by generating sympathy. Anything it might gain from a changed decision is secondary to lending support for a racing ruleset it thinks is closer to what racing should be about (and particularly a racing ruleset closer to its drivers’ understanding of what should and should not be done on circuit).
I am sure McLaren will lose on the “insufficient new evidence” clause, and the FIA in doing so will lose a certain amount of support for its stance. The press conference suggests McLaren’s already been at least partially successful in this aim, even before the FIA has had chance to look at the submission – at which point, the $15000 charge for the Right to Review has probably paid for itself.
BasCB (@bascb)
25th October 2024, 7:23
Solid take there Alianora.
Ludewig
25th October 2024, 10:12
@alianora-la-canta
Of course, McLaren has the big advantage that a British driver lost out here, so the biased racing media will defend their own. And in the English comment sections, the British people who are well known for being fair supporters, contribute with their own innovative takes.
SteveP
25th October 2024, 22:46
Yawn.
Esploratore (@esploratore1)
25th October 2024, 13:58
Wow, didn’t even know the right of review had a cost, that’s pretty steep for non-rich people for something that’s very often unsuccessful!
Pjotr (@pietkoster)
25th October 2024, 11:06
Almost all drivers know if you try to pass Verstappen on the outside you bring trouble upon yourself. Not only he will defend his position, he will use alle the rules in the FIA regulations. He is for the moment a bit to smart for Lando who fell for the trap.
Esploratore (@esploratore1)
25th October 2024, 14:01
As I recall in the last few years, hamilton was like that too at least, there’s been a case in china 2018 where verstappen had faster tyres, tried to overtake hamilton on the outside, hamilton ran him wide and verstappen lost a lot of time there, losing the race to ricciardo despite being the fastest red bull driver in that race.
Michael (@freelittlebirds)
25th October 2024, 22:27
Verstappen is not allowed to do that and he does it blatantly and intentionally. The regulations are very clear about leaving space. What you call intelligence is a complete and utter disregard for the racing rules without any repercussions since the sport has stewards but they seem to apply to everyone except one driver on the grid
The Dolphins
25th October 2024, 14:55
It’s most likely there will be no outcome from this, nor will we see a change in racing regulations for this season. With this mindset there is simply one outcome for the drivers: adjust your driving style.
With the benefit of hindsight Lando now knows he should not have made that pass on the outside. Arguably the correct thing is to maintain pace on the outside (having been forced off to avoid a collision) and rejoin alongside the other driver into the next corner where you can then, if you’re on the inside, trail off your brakes to be ahead at the apex and push the opponent wide on the outside. This can continue from corner to corner, drivers pushing each other off the track, and thus the sport will become the laughing stock of the racing world.
Edvaldo
25th October 2024, 15:11
They’re seeking to change this perception that the driver on the inside can do whatever he wants.
And Max has been doing this for years, some completely absurd, like that one in Interlagos, without getting a single penalty.
It’s hard to even believe that some of the stewards are former drivers so clueless are some of their decisions.
F1statsfan (@f1statsfan)
25th October 2024, 17:59
What I find odd is that the Stewards do not already have access to all possible video including all on board camera’s during the race.
I understand that viewing audience get a selection but the Stewards should have available every possible video that is being generated while they are at the circuit looking into situations that are referred to them.
Really weird that a times “new videos” turn up (other than fan videos) that previous might not have been available to the stewards.
In case of fan videos – in my opinion those should not be allowed at all as there is little to no control whether footage has been altered, AI generated or manipulated.
Michael Rhodes
25th October 2024, 22:46
from the recent technical report on cameras on F1TV it seems the 360 degree footage is not available until after the race (as it has to be downloaded and processed)
Mark (@mrcento)
25th October 2024, 20:27
I have no problem with Norris getting the penalty for overtaking off the track. 100% it should stand.
The issue is WHY he was off track. He’s been forced off by Max. Had the overtake not been completed, Max should have been getting a 5 second penalty. You can’t just shrug and say that’s become void because Norris then broke the rules after it and because of it. They should both have got penalties (which would, in effect have let the pass stand regardless). All they’ve done is effectively ok’d defending drivers running cars off the road, potentially compromising that drivers race for even attempting the pass and letting stewards work out if they get away with it.
What happened to letting them race?