For a few hours, it looked like Max Verstappen had ended his wait to claim pole position for the first time since the Austrian Grand Prix in June.
The last time he took pole position, Verstappen faced an anxious wait to learn whether the stewards would penalise him for driving unnecessarily slowly in the pit lane exit during qualifying. On that occasion they determined he hadn’t broken the rules and his pole position stood.In Qatar, Verstappen again took pole position during the session but again found himself under investigation. This time the outcome was different. The stewards issued Verstappen a highly unusual, though not unprecedented, one-place grid drop for the incident.
When race control announced during qualifying that Verstappen was under investigation, they observed he failed to obey the maximum delta time in qualifying. Drivers have been noted for this infringement many times this year without receiving penalties – there were no fewer than 38 examples of this in Friday’s sprint race qualifying session alone.
The announcement of Verstappen’s penalty was met by a predictably unhinged reaction on social media from those who jumped to the conclusion he had been penalised for something other drivers routinely avoid penalties for. The stewards’ explanation demonstrates otherwise.
The first indication Verstappen was at serious risk of a penalty came when the stewards officially announced his investigation. This confirmed he was not under investigation for merely failing to observe the maximum delta time, but for “driving unnecessarily slowly”.
Verstappen has tested this area of the regulations more than other drivers over the course of the season. Prior to this weekend, almost no other alleged cases of “driving unnecessarily slowly” had been noted by the stewards this year, except for two involving the Red Bull driver.
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
Then came Austria, where Verstappen slowed significantly in the pit lane exit during qualifying. Again, the stewards confirmed he hadn’t held up any other drivers, and on this occasion decided not to penalise him.
But yesterday’s case was different because Verstappen did impede another driver, in this case George Russell, one of three cars which passed the Red Bull during that lap. Russell caught Verstappen at the apex of turn 11, was surprised by how slowly he was driving, and had to take avoiding action which he (inevitably) claimed impaired his preparation for his flying lap.
In yesterday’s qualifying session, the stewards took no action over 17 cases of drivers failing to obey the maximum delta time. In each case they noted “the drivers took appropriate actions to not impede other drivers, and in all cases, they slowed down significantly to allow other drivers to pass while giving those drivers a clear track.
“The stewards therefore determine that all drivers concerned did not drive ‘unnecessarily slowly’, and that they were above the maximum time because they took appropriate steps, and we therefore take no further action.”
The same was true for the 38 cases of the same involving 17 drivers in the sprint race qualifying session. Two other drivers, Sergio Perez and Yuki Tsunoda, were reprimanded, though in their cases the stewards again noted “there is no evidence of any unsafe or disorderly conduct (such as unnecessary impeding).”
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
The stewards took the fact Russell was not on a flying lap in mitigation when penalising Verstappen. “Had [Russell] been on a push lap, the penalty would have most likely been the usual three grid position penalty, however in mitigation of penalty, it was obvious that [Russell] had clear visibility of [Verstappen] and that neither car was on a push lap.”
What might have been a three-place grid drop was therefore reduced to one. This is unusual, but not unheard of. Verstappen’s team mate Sergio Perez was given the same penalty in Mugello four years ago, and Nico Hulkenberg copped the same four years before that.
The sporting regulations state the stewards may “drop the driver such number of grid positions as they consider appropriate” for infringements. While three- and five-place grid penalties are most common, one- and two-place penalties have been seen in the past. No doubt Verstappen will be infuriated by his penalty, but he should console himself with the realisation it could easily have been worse.
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 Qatar Grand Prix
- Horner ‘believes 100%’ Verstappen did not threaten to crash into Russell
- Russell and Verstappen cast new light on clash which triggered explosive row
- Hamilton’s puncture not caused by mirror debris – Mercedes
- Another start-to-finish win shows Qatar GP could be F1’s most processional race
- “Am I dead last now?” Unheard radio from Hamilton’s disastrous Qatar GP
karla
1st December 2024, 11:43
The article still doesn’t answer if the other 38 incidents had drivers going slowly on the racing lap or not.
It also doesn’t answer if drivers going slowly need to stay off the racing line when there’s no one setting a fast lap behind them (they don’t). Max had no one on a fast lap, he was entitled to stay there.
Just because Russell decided to speed up in the middle of the lap to try and pass Max, doesn’t mean he’s entitled to have Max leave the racing line and let him pass.
Sorry, this has no logic. And I’m not even a max fan.
Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine)
1st December 2024, 12:39
You’re approaching this as if the only issue at stake was Verstappen not complying with the delta time. As the article points out, it became an issue of him driving unnecessarily slowly, which is not what the other drivers were noted for and cleared over.
notagrumpyfan
1st December 2024, 13:40
Staying below the delta time is not an offence, it’s merely an indication by the RD in which instances a driver is ‘deemed’ to go ‘unnecessarily slowly’.
OP is right to point out that it is still unclear why only in this instance it was penalised and in all other instances there were ‘exceptional circumstances’ in which staying below the delta was not considered ‘going unnecessarily slowly’.
RD event notes:
GeordiePorker (@geordieporker)
1st December 2024, 14:35
From the RD’s notes you have been kind enough to post, I will highlight 2 words:
“may” (from “may be deemed to be going unnecessarily slowly”). The use of “may” indicates that there are times when exceeding the delta WILL be deemed to be driving unnecessarily slowly and times when it WILL NOT. Otherwise the word “will” would have been used in the notes.
“unnecessarily” (from the same sentence). This indicates that there are times when a driver will be judged to have been driving “necessarily slowly.”
In most judgements for exceeding the delta time, the stewards note that the reason for the offence was that drivers slowed significantly to allow a driver on a push lap to pass without impeding them. In other words, it was necessary in those cases for the delta to be exceeded because the alternative was to prevent a diver achieving their best time. I think we can all agree this logic works. But it means that exceeding the delta does not also always mean driving unnecessarily slowly.
So in fact, the contentious point here is whether or not MV should have been adjudged to be driving unnecessarily slowly. I can see the arguments in both directions:
– GR wasn’t on a push lap, so why should MV have to yield?
– MV was driving excessively slowly (to build a gap) so why should GR have to compromise his prep lap?
It’s a tough one and unfortunately people’s inherent bias will make them see the facts they wish – something all humans are guilty of. Personally, I think this is a good precedence to set, because prep laps are very important and should not be compromised by others. I just wish it had happened to Lance Stroll (for example) first because it would have cause less angst.
Crawliin-from-the-wreckage- Special Unhinged Edition (@davedai)
1st December 2024, 15:01
Shame this but was not included
Obvious? No other explanation, creating, or maintaining a gap.?Hung drawn and quartered on an assumption. Not an obvious fact at all.
Stephen Crowsen (@drycrust)
1st December 2024, 15:53
Thank you for your very helpful explanation. It seems to me if George is on a preparation lap then having to go off the racing line to avoid Max shouldn’t have compromised his preparation lap.
notagrumpyfan
1st December 2024, 17:35
@geordieporker, I almost* fully agree with you.
I did not discuss those details to keep it simple.
My point was merely that Keith (incorrectly) answered to OP that there is a difference between a delta time offence and a ‘going unnecessarily slowly’ offence. This is incorrect as the first one (delta time) is NOT an offence, but merely an indication that there might (‘may’) have been a ‘going unnecessarily slowly’ offence. The RD correctly/smartly put a measurable threshold to (the possibility of having committed) this offence, but then leaves it arbitrary due to the ‘may’. I (probably incorrectly) assumed the ‘may’ was for the Stewards to decide if it was an offence or not, but it could be (and seems) that the RD uses the ‘may’ to determine if it is reported (‘noted’ by the stewards).
I agree with OP that the article insufficiently explains (or even reviews) why the other 17/38 incidents were not reported to the stewards, and if so why they were/were not investigated as a possible an offence. I haven’t checked all the steward’s decisions (could only find a Yuki incident, in which case he received a reprimand rather than a grid penalty), but I doubt that in all those instances the missed delta was solely due to letting a car a speed past.
As for my opinion: I fully agree that this was a ‘going unnecessarily slowly’ offence. I am just surprised that this is the first time a slow delta has resulted in this.The stewards were extremely lenient (even creative) in not penalising drivers (Verstappen and others) before when they were driving too slowly. All good to slow down (and off the racing line) when a fast car is approaching, but the driver should simply make up that lost time during the rest of the lap (or build a gap earlier) IMO.
They were creating a wrong precedent, and should not be surprised that Social Media is now exploding as it wasn’t Zhou or Stroll.
* you seem to indicate that missing the delta is an offence (“In most judgements for exceeding the delta time, the stewards note that the reason for the offence“), but it is not an offence in itself.
Robbie1
1st December 2024, 13:49
And you’re approaching it as Keith Collantine: it’s Max, let’s bend over backwards in an attempt to make this penalty justified.
What’s next: one of your articles delving into the psychology of Max and his upbringing?
Pathetic journalism at best.
GeordiePorker (@geordieporker)
1st December 2024, 14:21
This is needless. Keith’s article seeks to use the details reported by the FIA Stewards to explain why in this case MV was penalised when others were not; nothing in the article demonises MV, nor is demonstrably biased.
In fact, had the article declared the penalty as unjust it would have been biased.
The fact that you disagree with the stewards’ judgement is no reason to attack Keith.
Please keep it cordial.
Crawliin-from-the-wreckage- Special Unhinged Edition (@davedai)
1st December 2024, 14:33
Yessir your cordialship.
Please continue to refer to me as “unhinged”. I find it uplifting.
SteveP
1st December 2024, 15:20
A promoter of anti-British viewpoints for no good reason seems a better tag.
Maybe a time penalty for Max would have been better? Just one second seems reasonable. ;)
ludewig
1st December 2024, 17:02
@geordieporker
Keith actually started with the name calling, by calling people with another perspective ‘unhinged.’ There little reason for him complain then, if he gets back as good as he gave.
And Keith actually presented a very one-sided narrative.
SteveP
1st December 2024, 19:17
Hmmm.
The tone of the sentence here suggests that Keith was saying Russell was whinging, as many drivers do.
Like in the race – how many times did MV repeat the comment about going too fast under yellow flags?
“Sir, sir, he’s gone too fast, sir”
Now there’s a stat to chase – how many drivers haven’t done that kind of thing?
GeordiePorker (@geordieporker)
1st December 2024, 19:21
@ludwig
I’m not convinced Keith did call people with another perspective ‘unhinged.’ He said that the penalty “a predictably unhinged reaction on social media from those who jumped to the conclusion he had been penalised for something other drivers routinely avoid penalties for.” That isn’t a question of perspective, it’s a point that people were saying (in short): ‘Driver A exceeded the delta time but didn’t get punished, so why was Max punished?’ And the article attempts to explain what makes this case different.
There is a point here that perhaps including some of the ‘unhinged’ comments might have been useful to support his point. But to be honest, given some of the reaction in the comments section here, I can believe the comments on social media could reasonably be described as ‘unhinged.’
I disagree that the narrative is one-sided, however. It could be seen as such if you were looking to Keith to explain why no other driver was penalised, but the article clearly claims only to explain why MV /*was*/ punished. A feat I feel it manages with no significant bias.
Illusive (@illusive)
1st December 2024, 13:59
Lol, the stewards also stated that Russel had a clear view of what was going on, and also warned by his team multiple time that Max was going slow ahead prepping for a lap. There has been worse instances of blockage but none were punished, this is the first instance that this has happened in which the driver was not on a fast lap. So he deliberately sped up and did the act or was he not paying attention to the radios or clear visible line of sight he had, which is even more dangerous act from Russel as he could have crashed into Max.
David BR (@david-br)
1st December 2024, 13:40
Seems a pretty clear penalty and the article explains why. It’s the combination of going too slow and impeding another driver. Preparation laps are obviously important to optimizing push laps. Russell claimed he was compromised, who knows? But given Verstappen was driving too slowly, the question of whether he did affect his flying lap becomes moot. A one place drop seems a balanced call on the actual penalty.
Robbie1
1st December 2024, 13:52
“Seems a pretty clear penalty”
Oh really?
Then why did Lawson not get a penalty last week when Tsunoda almost rear ended him because he was driving slow?
Then why did Gasly not get a penalty when Max almost rear ended him in Brazil because Gasly was almost standing still?
RUTH222
1st December 2024, 14:01
Neither of them went to slowly during their prepartion-lap.
RBA
1st December 2024, 22:20
Lol bruh
Hamiltons P12 and asking to retire the car
notagrumpyfan
1st December 2024, 12:09
I don’t disagree with the 1 place grid drop, but they should give it to all 17 drivers who drive too slowly.
Can somebody sort out what the grid would mill like in that case? Bonus points if recalculating the Sprint Race grid.
Crawliin-from-the-wreckage- Special Unhinged Edition (@davedai)
1st December 2024, 13:03
Yes
first enter the cars number
then apply
f(n)=n/2 if it is even
3n+1 if n is odd and repeat til you get a packed front row
Drivers ages, grid positions work just as well.
Signed unhinged but without SM.
Sorry formatting didn’t take.
notagrumpyfan
1st December 2024, 13:20
Well, Mr Collatz knows they’ll all end up on pole position, he just cannot prove it yet ;)
Crawliin-from-the-wreckage- Special Unhinged Edition (@davedai)
1st December 2024, 13:30
LOL perhaps that’s why when one of Einstein’s students asked if these were the same questions as last year’s exam,?
He replied “they are”!
BUT this year the answers may be different.
Alas not in this case I fear.Although if I can get my brain down to absolute zero who knows? Belay that we’ll try with a computer rather than my brain.
Johan
1st December 2024, 12:13
You cant impede a driver on a slow lap
M2X
1st December 2024, 12:59
When you are looking for a stick to beat with, you are always going to find one.
Bob C.
1st December 2024, 13:17
The use of that word surprised me, but not being a English native speaker I went to the bother of looking a definition of “unhinged” up. The Cambridge Dictionary suggests “mentally ill”, Mirriam-Webster suggests “Highly disturbed, unstable”.
Really?
Of course, online you can always find someone sprouting really weird opinions and conspiracy theories, but the vast majority of opinion that I have seen question why VER was penalised for something that appears to be common and unpenalised practice, this race and many others.
I think it has been a long season, and maybe we all, and I do mean ALL, need a good long break from F1
Yours unhingedly
Moi
1st December 2024, 14:05
Bonus points for the gall of calling the ‘social media’ fans who you depend upon for traffic to your little site ‘unhinged’ though.
When you see the chance to stir up some controversy you create a dozen articles on the same subject for the clicks, but this time you are obviously far above it all.
ludewig
1st December 2024, 17:05
Indeed, why do journalists so often roll around in the mud and then simultaneously pretend to be above it all? I guess the power of having a big reach goes to their head.
Adam (@rocketpanda)
1st December 2024, 14:10
Nah, I don’t agree. Mercedes fiddling the tyre pressures when they shouldn’t wasn’t a penalty, Norris going for another formation lap when the light wasn’t green wasn’t a penalty and Sainz crossing the pit entry line wasn’t a penalty but this was? Neither driver was on a push lap, Russell was given more than adequate time and space to take caution (which was noted by the stewards), and nobody was ‘impeded’ or disadvantaged. This was a fine, maybe a penalty point at best, not a grid drop.
Michael (@freelittlebirds)
1st December 2024, 14:11
If Russell had done the same to Max, Red Bull would have gotten a three-place grid drop.
I have no idea why people view that as unfair to Max.
Can we talk about the divebomb last year in Las Vegas where Russell got penalized? That was probably the most insane call I’ve seen – the equivalent of a defender kicking someone in the box and earning himself a penalty FOR his team and they all walk to the other side of the field to take it.
Crawliin-from-the-wreckage- Special Unhinged Edition (@davedai)
1st December 2024, 15:05
I’ll set myself conundrum to put me to sleep.
Which is the quicker slow way to negotiate a triple apex while keeping wholly off and never crossing the racing line?