Formula 1’s governing body has rejected McLaren’s appeal to reconsider the five-second penalty imposed on Lando Norris during the United States Grand Prix. This penalty, which was handed out for overtaking title contender Max Verstappen off the track, resulted in Norris finishing fourth instead of third in the final race standings.
The result meant that Verstappen extended his championship lead by 57 points with 5 races to go, giving the Dutchman a much-needed breathing space heading into Autodrome in Mexico.
A hearing took place on Friday, during which a team representative was required to participate in a video conference with the stewards. In a document issued by the FIA regarding the request, it was noted that the hearing aimed to assess whether there was a “significant and relevant new element that was not available to the party seeking the review at the time of the original decision.”
It was stated that if McLaren’s appeal would be upheld, a second hearing would follow. However, that was not the case as the Stewarts dismissed the Papayas’ plea.
In a document detailing the case’s outcome, it was noted that McLaren contended that a statement in the original decision document was inaccurate, specifically the assertion that “Car 4 was overtaking Car 1 on the outside but was not alongside Car 1 at the apex.”
The team claimed this was a mistake, presenting evidence that Norris had already overtaken Verstappen and was ahead “at the braking zone.” Meanwhile, Red Bull, represented by Jonathan Wheatley, expressed their view that the conditions for a successful petition for a ‘Right of Review’ had not been satisfied in this instance.
DOC 78 – Decision – McLaren Formula 1 Team Right of Review #USGP #F1 #FIA pic.twitter.com/9x7XCyRFHE
— FIA (@fia) October 26, 2024
It is further stated in the document: “In relation to relevance, McLaren appears to submit that the Stewards finding that “Car 4 had overtaken Car 1 before the apex (and therefore that Car 1 was the overtaking car) and that this asserted error is itself, a new element.”
“This is unsustainable. A petition for review is made in order to correct an error (of fact or law) in a decision. Any new element must demonstrate that error. The error that must be shown to exist, cannot itself be the element referred to in Article 14. In this case, the concept that the written Decision was the significant and relevant new element, or that an error in the decision was a new element, is not sustainable and is, therefore rejected.” the statement read.
The Stewarts also believed that McLaren’s appeal was launched in ‘good faith’.
Max Verstappen was denied a podium for a similar incident
Verstappen had suffered the same faith in the 2017 US Grand Prix when the 20-year-old was denied a place on the podium for overtaking Kimi Raikkonen off the track. Verstappen had just entered the cool-down room and taken a sip of water when race officials notified him of a 5-second penalty. They determined that Verstappen’s car had gone completely off track, gaining an unfair advantage.
The Dutchman claimed that incidents like those occurred throughout the race, coinciding with Norris’ claims who also quoted Verstappen had passed him completely off the track at the start of the race at the 2024 US Grand Prix.
Read More: How Does the F1 Championship Standings Look After the US Grand Prix?
Mohd Faisal Hakak is a sports author from Kashmir. He likes to keep tabs on the sporting world with a keen interest in football, motorsports, NBA, and other marquee sports. He is a science graduate from Islamia College Srinagar.
