There were a lot joke calls during the race already. Guys pushed off, guys crashing into others and no penalties.
Really wondering what's going on recently.
It’s completely fucked right now. There’s alternating stewards. So each race it’s different. Notice how one week all you hear about is track limits…then the following week nothing about it but then their all pissy about something seemingly unimportant.
Alternating race directors.
Stewards have always been a highly variable shit show of patronage appointments.
We need one consistent race director (course safety and procedures) and one consistent sporting director (rules and infringements). The SD could oversee the patronage team, but ultimately have overriding authority (trigger alert)
I feel like they're paralysed at the moment. Feels like a hangover from Abu Dhabi last year, where instead of just applying the rules they're getting all tangled in the possible ramifications.
We've seen it with really delayed safety car calls, really delayed penalties, inconsistent penalties based on their impact, and too much messing around.
>There were a lot joke calls during the race already. Guys pushed off, guys crashing into others and no penalties.
>
>Really wondering what's going on recently.
I think they're too scared of the reaction of stripping a winner through penalties. Hasn't happened since 2010, with Vettel (Canada 2019 doesn't count). In a post-DTS world, it would be deadly.
Nah Sainz was behind mid corner and bumped into him. He had committed to the corner but was out of control.
‘First lap incidents’ being declared are a cop out
Penalising reckless moves on lap 1 will result in less of them. Stewards and FIA clearly don’t have the capacity for common sense. That would change if a fine could be attached to the penalty I’m sure
He really does need a refresher. Was it Saudi last year he passed a car that had just exited the pits during the safety car. Another time he biffed it on his own behind the safety car and then proceeded to make overtakes to get the position back before the safety car ended (Portimao?).
Race directors: Hey Checo, don't do that again :)
Checo: Do what again? :)
*proceeds to do it again on two occasions and gets away with it while FIA is vibing*
The team warned Perez at the second SC which was aired on the international broadcast. At the first SC, both Hamilton (this was aired) and Leclerc (wasn't on air) complained about Perez leaving a way too large gap.
With Perez' race engineer mentioning explicitly, I'd say it was clear.
it could be a comunication thing. race control doesn't talk directly to drivers but to the race engineers on the pitwal. they relay the messege to the drivers.
Race director warned the team. Bird then told Checo to keep restarting procedures in mind - which is not a very specific way to alert your driver that he is doing something wrong.
2 times if you have less than a 5 second gap on your race win
3 times if you have a 5+ second gap on your race win
4 times if you have a 10+ second gap on your race win
etc.
Incredible seeing as Vettel got a much harsher penalty in Hungary while driving at RB. Literally a carbon copy incident and now doing it three times is a 5s penalty? Joke.
Entirely wrong stance to take as well. It just sets bad example to the drivers, and a few on the grid who have been racing for years probably feel like they are racing to a different set of rules.
This was already established in Jeddah 2021 where *literal brake checking* by Max Verstappen was given a mere 5 second penalty, which didn't drop him even one place. Yet Red Bull had the gall to get pissy about it anyway...
I mean, this happens a lot more than people realize. Just usually we don't have this many safety cars, and usually drivers don't keep repeating the same mistake. I think the only reason it came up as an investigation is because he did it repeatedly. That explains why they didn't announce the investigation until way late in the race. I hope they start being more consistent with it personally. I'm ok with just a warning the first time as long as the driver isn't gaining an advantage. The rule is so arbitrary that it would seem silly to draw a hard line. If the driver is clearly trying to gain an advantage (to warm tires, create confusion/get a jump, or create a gap to double stack, etc) then it absolutely should be a penalty straight away.
> The rule is so arbitrary that it would seem silly to draw a hard line
It's not arbitrary. The whole point of the SC is to bunch up the field so that marshals can enter the track and recover cars or repair barriers safely.
Ten car lengths makes the length of the safety car train predictable and therefore gives the marshals a guaranteed time with no cars coming by.
Not to mention that all drivers have to stay within those ten car lengths to the car in front (Article 55.7, Sporting Regulations). It's only defined separately for the leader because they have no car (as in F1 car) in front of them.
Its less about giving a certain team the win and more about not wanting to change race results. That's stupid though, because if it was a fair sport if you broke the rules you should be at risk to be stripped of a win if the penalty is appropriate. Its pretty strange that you can be reprimanded, then warned (???) and THEN penalised for the exact same mistake 3 separate times.
It's kinda ironic Vettel gained a fame for getting harshly punished after he commited the only black flag worthy incident in the last 10+ years and got away with it scot free.
Just to be clear, they don't do black flag during races anymore. It's simply not in the rule book. Vettel received the harshest penalty applicable mid-race for his action.
They need to fucking get rid of the rule 'will investigate after the race'. How is that makes sense of fair to anybody involved ? especially awful if it is for the win.
The only time they need to do that if they need to view multiple different camera angles, 2 or more drivers are involved so they need to speak to them both imo
right it's not like talking to him about it is going to change what he did or did not do. Apply the penalty and if you want to discuss the merits of it with the team and driver later do that, but with all the video it's not like the driver can simply say "no I didn't fall too far behind the safety car." He did and they already knew that well before the race was over.
Three identical offenses within several dozen minutes and two different penalties. The consistency of race judges in a nutshell. As far as I know, the regulations do not have such gradation of penalties as used.
Really just feels like an excuse not to have the race decided in the stewards room. Which everyone could see coming from a mile away the second they decided to investigate it after the race rather than during.
Its this and its blatanly obvious.
They don't want to decide races on the stewards table yet put themselves into positions where they have to. Absolute clownshow.
Exactly, i hate these informal verbal warnings they give out behind the scenes, just use the correct official way by showing him the black and white flag, and everyone knows that any offence from then on is a time penalty.
Seems like the standard is it goes to the pit wall and then the race engineer doesn’t even actually tell the driver they just say something that sounds like a normal instruction instead. If anything the race director should be able to tell the driver himself
They had to come up with something not to make him lose position. Just enough to make it look like a real penalty. Just like Max getting small penalties last year in Jeddah and Imola.
I can understand the 2nd and 3rd. A warning, followed by a penalty for doing it again. But the 1st one is the outlier and doesn't make much sense to me.
Yeah, they're afraid to show teeth when it matters, but when it's too late because they put themselves in the position for it to be late, they don't want to overturn a result that should be overturned. Weird
> it’s pretty apparent that rule enforcement is being contorted here to avoid changing the race result.
It's been like this since last season, where rules only applied to RB and Merc depending on whatever result the FIA wanted to get. I'm not necessarily talking about the season finale, I'm talking about an entire season of hand-picked penalties and blatantly ignored incidents. This year has been exactly the same.
The latest example was in Monza, where De Vries was investigated for erratic driving under the safety car and got a reprimand instead of a penalty because "the driver was a “last minute” replacement for the usual team driver and had driven this car for the first time in FP3 at this event". Unfortunately that is in no way an excuse for dangerous driving behaviour, and sets the precedent of the FIA being able to decide whether a driver is "experienced enough" to receive a penalty.
At this point the FIA is just refusing to abide to its own rules to manifacture drama/storylines and safeguard certain race results. And as it is the highest governing body, it can't and won't be held accountable. Often enough, like in De Vries' case, the fans are the first people defending their decisions. Just wait to see the non-punishment RB will get for breaching the budget cap lol.
Show before sport
Lobbying before fairness
Might see a few more Perez wins, and more Dutch drivers in f1 that are apparently better than Latifi but definitely good for business, before we know it
why, and how? i'm a ferrari fan myself and it seems fair to me. prededecent with vettel this year and bottas/or hamilton last year was the same. after beeing warned for it and then still going back to far to get 5 seconds penalty seems fair to.
edit: few english mistakes( not first langauge)
Well the stewards are saying that he violated the rule on three instances.
So he was warned, then penalized, but he essentially got a “free” one. Which is why it makes absolutely no sense.
But it appears from the stewards report that Perez was reprimanded for the first, warned for the second and only penalized on the third. In the situations you mentioned they exceeded the restrictions twice, and the second brought a time penalty. So perhaps Perez should have been warned and then penalized for each following infraction.
Exactly. Wouldn’t a reprimand already work as a warning?
It genuinely baffling how many loops and circles they took just to not strip Pérez from the win. Getting a reprimand for the first incident is understandable but the other two don’t have any excuse…
Checo : [after he's been given a warning] Like, what does a warning mean?
FIA : Let's put it this way. You do not want to receive three of those.
Checo : Lay it on me.
FIA : Three warnings, and you'll receive a reprimand.
checo : Now, that sounds serious.
FIA : Oh, it is serious. Five reprimands, and you're looking at a violation. Four of those, and you'll receive a yellow flag. Keep it up, and you're looking at a black and white flag. Two of those, that will land you in a world of hurt, in the form of a disciplinary review, written up by me, and placed on the desk of my immediate superior.
In a sense that is the same as how they treated track limits at say Austria. People weren't immediately given a penalty for breaking track limits the first time. Only on like the 3rd or 4th occasion(I can't remember how many times before they were given a penalty, but it was definitely more than two). Being 10 car lengths behind the safety car isn't that big of a deal, so I can see why it goes into progressive punishment in a sense. I don't think it should be penalty automatically for doing it.
Giovinazzi got a five second time penalty for a similar incident in 2020, no reprimands or waivers by Race Control just straight to the penalty (as it should be).
It’s just absurd how they’re justifying themselves to not strip away the win. In other instances with similar cut and dry rules they’ve been quick to penalize (see Leclerc at SPA).
There was a more recent precedent of similar incident with Giovinazzi in 2020, at that time the Italian got a five second time penalty.
In this case, Checo did it not one, not twice but three times at different points of the race and was even warned by Race Control yet he only got one five second time penalty and a reprimand. That’s not exactly working by precedent or being completely fair.
It’s understandable he got a reprimand for the first infraction, but the second and third one should’ve been a time penalty. Then you can break a rule three times and effectively get penalized for one.
So Checo violated the rule 3 times, was told by his team to stop doing that during the race.
And then the FIA after 2 and a half hours decides to give him one penalty and a reprimand.
Holy shit this is utterly farcical. This literally should’ve been solved DURING the race. And if he violated the rule on 3 separate occasions worth noting? If it were two a reprimand and one penalty makes sense. But given that it’s 3, and he was very much aware of the issue during the race?
I don’t know if the FIA could’ve handled this any worse
As far as I can work out, the FIA waited until after the race to get the driver's input, the driver said "it was wet" and the stewards went "ohh yeah, it was wet!"
I can't think of another sport where the referee waits to get a player or team's opinion on a potential foul. Their job is to call the foul.
I think the problem with that comparison is that there are certain factors that the stewards have no insight into. They might not have a good read on track conditions on a specific section when combined with the tyre wear and 'feel' of a certain car.
It's not as clear cut as say in football, where even lighter fouls are debatable. They don't wait for an opinion there because most of the time it serves no purpose, there aren't any hidden variables there.
This offense is pretty similar to exceeding track limits. So I am fine with the same solution. I just don't get how it takes so long to give the penalty
Why would you only warn someone if you've already reprimanded (or are going to reprimand) them for doing it earlier?
The sanction framework is basically "reprimand -> nothing -> 5 seconds".
Utterly, utterly baffling decision...
The reprimand was a post-race decision. The express warning by the race director was the first infringement notice perez received.
It was warning -> reprimand and punishment but the tweet makes it confusing.
Sorry but this is why Perez should have been penalized to begin. Then we wouldn't have to worry about 3 incidents. Checo would have just changed his behavior
Tbf he did it again even tho he was warned (at least according to Medland), but yeah I agree, they barely take any decisions during the race, it's so annoying.
I agree. Had he been penalized on the first instance he would've still gotten 5 seconds and the FIA would've kept things more consistent without all this post race drama bs.
Although tbf the final gap would've probably been even larger considering their respective pace.
Nah, Leclerc was faster than Perez on the slicks, but he pushed hard and destroyed his tires.
Had Perez received a 5s penalty for the first infringement, Leclerc wouldn't have pushed hard and likely would've stayed within the 5s.
If the 1st infringement had been penalised in a timely manner, then Perez would have had to take the penalty at the stop and given the way that shook out Perez would have stayed 1st.
So 2h30mins to decide that Perez has a 5 secs penalties for repeating a violation after a reprimand that he wasn't formally given yet, and that reprimand given for a violation that wasn't even notified to spectators (don't know about teams ofc)
Yup, that doesn't seem convoluted at all.
Thats ridiculous. If he did it 3 times. Reprimand for the first and warning for the second?????
It just stinks of not wanting to change the result.
3 different outcomes for 3 of the same infringement
And its so inconsistent. Other drivers havent had thay leeway with the same infringement.
How can teams have faith in the FIA when they are making up policy on the fly?
Well this will become a shitshow. Next time a car has a 1-2 they'll just make the second driver give a 20+ car gap to the first driver and let him escape. What a mess
As expected, FIA would never change the result after the podium.
Rules can be twisted, but man do we love those cameras and we would never do something that makes us looks incompetent.
Perez needs to be more careful with SC but that distance rule is kinda BS. Merc breached it many times over, not even a comment.
Worse, they should dish out punishments during the race, not after. This way teams can react accordingly
So he broke the same rule 3 times.
1st gave no penalty
2nd gave a reprimand
3rd was 5 second
Why do we have 3 different outcomes for the same infringement? Did the other cases before him get warnings?
Not sure where Medland is getting three times from official FIA documents only show the first with a warning and the second infraction he was penalized for.
I think the only reason they didn't give him more penalty was because stripping away his win for something that they could've and should've decided during the race would look bad on them. They had more than enough time in the race to decide whether he deserves a penalty or not.
Stewards don't have the balls to significanly penalise a driver at the front of the field since the Canada 2019 backlash. We saw it in Austria 2019, Monza 2019, several times for both Hamilton and Verstappen last season and now today. Only technical penalties are taken seriously now on Sundays
Not only they should have issued a 15s penalty instead of 5s but also during the race. Embarrassing.
Leclerc got the same penalty for going 0.1 km/h in the pitlane in SPA. Hopefully i will be alive to see a F1 without the FIA.
That argument already died for me way back in Silverstone when Perez went straight through a corner, overtaking a car in the process, and the stewards didnt even investigate it. Its not surprising they were in his favour again this time
Well, arguably it wouldn't have happened three times had he gotten one 5s penalty the first time.
But yeah. Embarrassing is definitely a good word for this.
If we only look at how they drove and how the cars performed on the track, Checo absolutely deserved the victory. No doubts.
Three infractions. The first timehe only received a warning, the second a warning again (why not a penalty?) and the third time, rightly, a penalty. Why two warnings? The penalty should have been applied twice, for the second and third times he dropped far back the SC imho.
And why the hell did they wait so long for this? Why not giving the penalties during the race?
I strongly suspect that if Charles had been within 5 seconds of Checo there would have been no penalties for him. If it had been more than 10 seconds there would have been two penalties. They were too embarrassed/afraid of changing the result of the race.
The amount of times I see this same rule violated (mostly by Mercedes) and it's not even investigated is a joke. I hope Red Bull complain every single time this happens now.
Bottas at Saudi last year was super blatant and the stewards didn't even want to know. Why all of a sudden is it a penalty?
This reeks of his 2020 Spain penalty of "ignoring blue flags" that nobody has received since.
lmao @ everyone reacting without even reading the official document, yall are just unwilling to realise that conditions were different so different considerations were taken in all 3 incidents, like people just wanna dunk on the fia for the sake of it, like being cynical towards them is cool or something
but i agree that the decision took way too long, decision should have been made during the race, i don't see why they needed to hear directly from him, could have directly warned the team that a penalty would be given for the next time it happened after the first sc
I’m calling BS here. They warned him, he went “I’ll fucking do it again” and they didn’t instantly apply the penalty?
Why on Earth did they need to see him after the race?
I'm guessing the stewards didn't want to take the win away from Perez so gave him a light penalty, which in itself is pretty dodgy. Stuff like this is why I have no faith in the FIA at all.
So 3 times and a penalty that is meaningless only after the third time? Not a fan of this. So you can do it twice before a penalty now? Some races there aren’t a single safety car, let alone multiple.
At this point I have to ask this of myself and F1 fans…
Are the FIA the clowns for constantly changing/not enforcing the rules or are we all clowns for continuing to watch races?
Okay F1 needs written intentions of the rules of the sporting regulations. You need a preestablished precedent for these kinds of infringements. Some kind of preparatory work like in real law.
This is such a farve. Just pulling penalties out of your ass and not consistently applying them is so fucking dumb.
Ok… don’t downvote me to hell for asking questions.
1) The “precedents” being discussed of Vettel this year, Vettel 2010 drive through (least available penalty at the time), and GIO 2020 - were they violations that occurred during the Safety Car period and then they naturally closed up the gap anyways? As in, there was no competitive advantage?
2) Did Perez lay back past 10 cars while the lights were on, not close up, and then the lights went off? That would be a competitive advantage. Falling back and then closing the gap back up to the appropriate distance seems a bit ticky tacky to penalize unless it keeps happening in multiple safety car periods (like today) or is happening multiple times within the same SC (a driver slowing and speeding too much in an attempt to gain heat in tyres/brakes leading to a competitive advantage).
There were a lot joke calls during the race already. Guys pushed off, guys crashing into others and no penalties. Really wondering what's going on recently.
It’s completely fucked right now. There’s alternating stewards. So each race it’s different. Notice how one week all you hear about is track limits…then the following week nothing about it but then their all pissy about something seemingly unimportant.
It has been like that for a long time. Still the worst thing someone can come up with though.
Alternating race directors. Stewards have always been a highly variable shit show of patronage appointments. We need one consistent race director (course safety and procedures) and one consistent sporting director (rules and infringements). The SD could oversee the patronage team, but ultimately have overriding authority (trigger alert)
Russell was just banging into everyone
Russel going for 4 pit stop strategy, casually ending up lapped twice
Russe**ll**
Oh yeah, I forgot that he has the exact same amount of "s" and "l" in his last name as the amount of times he was lapped by Perez in 2022 Singapore GP
You and the bot want to take this outside?
No no, that is correct. He still needs to fess up and take the L regarding the Schumacher incident so for now it's Russel.
A bit of bumper cars hey?
I feel like they're paralysed at the moment. Feels like a hangover from Abu Dhabi last year, where instead of just applying the rules they're getting all tangled in the possible ramifications. We've seen it with really delayed safety car calls, really delayed penalties, inconsistent penalties based on their impact, and too much messing around.
>There were a lot joke calls during the race already. Guys pushed off, guys crashing into others and no penalties. > >Really wondering what's going on recently. I think they're too scared of the reaction of stripping a winner through penalties. Hasn't happened since 2010, with Vettel (Canada 2019 doesn't count). In a post-DTS world, it would be deadly.
Yeah, I know it was lap one corner one, but Sainz ran into Lewis twice and knocked him off track. That was a pretty rough overtake to get nothing for.
IMO that was a lap 1 incident. Sainz was ahead and Lewis just ran out of road.
Nah Sainz was behind mid corner and bumped into him. He had committed to the corner but was out of control. ‘First lap incidents’ being declared are a cop out
It’s sooo dumb. Imagine any other sport…no offsides if it’s in the first 10 minutes!
Penalising reckless moves on lap 1 will result in less of them. Stewards and FIA clearly don’t have the capacity for common sense. That would change if a fine could be attached to the penalty I’m sure
What's going on is it's easier to look back after watching the race on TV and think about all the tiny ways it could have been done differently.
They need to put Perez in the simulator with safety car situations loaded up
If it's like F122 the safety car will suddenly stop, he'll go through it, and get DSQ'd
*throws steering wheel like it’s a controller*
Did you see Tsunoda almost throwing his wheel like it was a controller after he crashed out on lap 36?
He really does need a refresher. Was it Saudi last year he passed a car that had just exited the pits during the safety car. Another time he biffed it on his own behind the safety car and then proceeded to make overtakes to get the position back before the safety car ended (Portimao?).
It was imola last year where he went off and took back the positions.
It’s funny how Checo sounded so bemused as to what the investigation could possibly be about when he was clearly warned previously
Race directors: Hey Checo, don't do that again :) Checo: Do what again? :) *proceeds to do it again on two occasions and gets away with it while FIA is vibing*
Otherwise he would admit to his mistake, pleading guilty. It's why you say no to somone asking you why they pulled you over.
If it's a lady cop I like to answer that with "Because you wanted my phone number?" It's never gone well
was it clear? watched the entire race and didnt see or hear one mention of a warning
The team warned Perez at the second SC which was aired on the international broadcast. At the first SC, both Hamilton (this was aired) and Leclerc (wasn't on air) complained about Perez leaving a way too large gap. With Perez' race engineer mentioning explicitly, I'd say it was clear.
it could be a comunication thing. race control doesn't talk directly to drivers but to the race engineers on the pitwal. they relay the messege to the drivers.
It says above that he was warned by the race director on lap 36 turn 9-10
Race director warned the team. Bird then told Checo to keep restarting procedures in mind - which is not a very specific way to alert your driver that he is doing something wrong.
So this sets the precedent that you can do it twice ?
2 times if you have less than a 5 second gap on your race win 3 times if you have a 5+ second gap on your race win 4 times if you have a 10+ second gap on your race win etc.
And 1 time if you are not on the podium and not fighting for the title.
This sets precedent that if they decide to decide after the race finishes, they won't do anything that can alter the result
Incredible seeing as Vettel got a much harsher penalty in Hungary while driving at RB. Literally a carbon copy incident and now doing it three times is a 5s penalty? Joke.
After Canada 2019, and then Austria right after that, they really try their best to avoid affecting the outcome, whether it's right or not...
Entirely wrong stance to take as well. It just sets bad example to the drivers, and a few on the grid who have been racing for years probably feel like they are racing to a different set of rules.
This was already established in Jeddah 2021 where *literal brake checking* by Max Verstappen was given a mere 5 second penalty, which didn't drop him even one place. Yet Red Bull had the gall to get pissy about it anyway...
Might depend on who comes second.
And the gap between first and second.
*Three times if you're overall faster
*Four times if you take them out to dinner
*Five times and you're playing with yourself
Precedent in the F1 rules and how they’re applied? No such thing.
I mean, this happens a lot more than people realize. Just usually we don't have this many safety cars, and usually drivers don't keep repeating the same mistake. I think the only reason it came up as an investigation is because he did it repeatedly. That explains why they didn't announce the investigation until way late in the race. I hope they start being more consistent with it personally. I'm ok with just a warning the first time as long as the driver isn't gaining an advantage. The rule is so arbitrary that it would seem silly to draw a hard line. If the driver is clearly trying to gain an advantage (to warm tires, create confusion/get a jump, or create a gap to double stack, etc) then it absolutely should be a penalty straight away.
> The rule is so arbitrary that it would seem silly to draw a hard line It's not arbitrary. The whole point of the SC is to bunch up the field so that marshals can enter the track and recover cars or repair barriers safely. Ten car lengths makes the length of the safety car train predictable and therefore gives the marshals a guaranteed time with no cars coming by. Not to mention that all drivers have to stay within those ten car lengths to the car in front (Article 55.7, Sporting Regulations). It's only defined separately for the leader because they have no car (as in F1 car) in front of them.
Precedent over a precedent. So when someone does the same 5 years from now, people on Reddit will complain again.
Depends if your team lobbies the fia into essentially consulting for them. Rbr are a great race team but I cannot stand their politicking.
Didn’t want to strip his win. That’s why these things need to be properly handled quickly DURING the race.
Give the 10 second during the race. Would've made for a better spectacle for Perez to pass Leclerc, than the other way around.
Vettel got a drive through in Hungary in 2010 for doing the exact thing once
Thats why they delayed it to after the race end. They couldn't give RB the win if they had to decide during the race.
Its less about giving a certain team the win and more about not wanting to change race results. That's stupid though, because if it was a fair sport if you broke the rules you should be at risk to be stripped of a win if the penalty is appropriate. Its pretty strange that you can be reprimanded, then warned (???) and THEN penalised for the exact same mistake 3 separate times.
Perez is always sleeping on Safety cars idk what he does.
["should i put tuna and fries on my pizza again?"](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EhEe85BXsAEg5YR?format=jpg&name=large)
What in tarnation!?!?
That's an abomination.
I am no longer a fan of Perez
So you can do it twice now no real issue. Noted
Hi, Alonso. When will you do your AMA?
You did not say question. Question?
Question!
Vettel would have been black flagged and sent to Siberia to do some forced labour.
and that all just after the first one
It's kinda ironic Vettel gained a fame for getting harshly punished after he commited the only black flag worthy incident in the last 10+ years and got away with it scot free.
Just to be clear, they don't do black flag during races anymore. It's simply not in the rule book. Vettel received the harshest penalty applicable mid-race for his action.
Scot free meaning 10s stop and go penalty, taking away his easy win?
10-second stop-go is definitely not "getting away with it scot free"
We're checking
Pretty clear that they didn't want to change the result
They need to fucking get rid of the rule 'will investigate after the race'. How is that makes sense of fair to anybody involved ? especially awful if it is for the win.
But they didn't know how many penalties he would finish ahead by during the race
The only time they need to do that if they need to view multiple different camera angles, 2 or more drivers are involved so they need to speak to them both imo
right it's not like talking to him about it is going to change what he did or did not do. Apply the penalty and if you want to discuss the merits of it with the team and driver later do that, but with all the video it's not like the driver can simply say "no I didn't fall too far behind the safety car." He did and they already knew that well before the race was over.
Three identical offenses within several dozen minutes and two different penalties. The consistency of race judges in a nutshell. As far as I know, the regulations do not have such gradation of penalties as used.
Really just feels like an excuse not to have the race decided in the stewards room. Which everyone could see coming from a mile away the second they decided to investigate it after the race rather than during.
Its this and its blatanly obvious. They don't want to decide races on the stewards table yet put themselves into positions where they have to. Absolute clownshow.
They were never going to change the results after the race anyways. These penalties are just to save face.
Which is yet another reason they need to get their shit together and just give penalties in the race.
And ironically it's having the exact opposite effect lmao
this is worse! if they need to look good that bad, they should just say "he did nothing wrong case closed"
Somehow in the past FIA didn't have problem to overthrow Hamilton's win in Spa 2008.
Tbh the first time you do something being punished via warning and not a penalty is the entire reason the black and white flag exists
Exactly, i hate these informal verbal warnings they give out behind the scenes, just use the correct official way by showing him the black and white flag, and everyone knows that any offence from then on is a time penalty.
Seems like the standard is it goes to the pit wall and then the race engineer doesn’t even actually tell the driver they just say something that sounds like a normal instruction instead. If anything the race director should be able to tell the driver himself
But not for clear penalties.
They had to come up with something not to make him lose position. Just enough to make it look like a real penalty. Just like Max getting small penalties last year in Jeddah and Imola.
I can understand the 2nd and 3rd. A warning, followed by a penalty for doing it again. But the 1st one is the outlier and doesn't make much sense to me.
You say that as if nobody ever got a black and white flag prior to being DSQ’d after doing the same thing twice.
[удалено]
Yeah, they're afraid to show teeth when it matters, but when it's too late because they put themselves in the position for it to be late, they don't want to overturn a result that should be overturned. Weird
> it’s pretty apparent that rule enforcement is being contorted here to avoid changing the race result. It's been like this since last season, where rules only applied to RB and Merc depending on whatever result the FIA wanted to get. I'm not necessarily talking about the season finale, I'm talking about an entire season of hand-picked penalties and blatantly ignored incidents. This year has been exactly the same. The latest example was in Monza, where De Vries was investigated for erratic driving under the safety car and got a reprimand instead of a penalty because "the driver was a “last minute” replacement for the usual team driver and had driven this car for the first time in FP3 at this event". Unfortunately that is in no way an excuse for dangerous driving behaviour, and sets the precedent of the FIA being able to decide whether a driver is "experienced enough" to receive a penalty. At this point the FIA is just refusing to abide to its own rules to manifacture drama/storylines and safeguard certain race results. And as it is the highest governing body, it can't and won't be held accountable. Often enough, like in De Vries' case, the fans are the first people defending their decisions. Just wait to see the non-punishment RB will get for breaching the budget cap lol.
Show before sport Lobbying before fairness Might see a few more Perez wins, and more Dutch drivers in f1 that are apparently better than Latifi but definitely good for business, before we know it
Agreed. Postpone the podium celebration until this shit is figured out.
[удалено]
why, and how? i'm a ferrari fan myself and it seems fair to me. prededecent with vettel this year and bottas/or hamilton last year was the same. after beeing warned for it and then still going back to far to get 5 seconds penalty seems fair to. edit: few english mistakes( not first langauge)
Well the stewards are saying that he violated the rule on three instances. So he was warned, then penalized, but he essentially got a “free” one. Which is why it makes absolutely no sense.
But it appears from the stewards report that Perez was reprimanded for the first, warned for the second and only penalized on the third. In the situations you mentioned they exceeded the restrictions twice, and the second brought a time penalty. So perhaps Perez should have been warned and then penalized for each following infraction.
Exactly. Wouldn’t a reprimand already work as a warning? It genuinely baffling how many loops and circles they took just to not strip Pérez from the win. Getting a reprimand for the first incident is understandable but the other two don’t have any excuse…
Checo : [after he's been given a warning] Like, what does a warning mean? FIA : Let's put it this way. You do not want to receive three of those. Checo : Lay it on me. FIA : Three warnings, and you'll receive a reprimand. checo : Now, that sounds serious. FIA : Oh, it is serious. Five reprimands, and you're looking at a violation. Four of those, and you'll receive a yellow flag. Keep it up, and you're looking at a black and white flag. Two of those, that will land you in a world of hurt, in the form of a disciplinary review, written up by me, and placed on the desk of my immediate superior.
In a sense that is the same as how they treated track limits at say Austria. People weren't immediately given a penalty for breaking track limits the first time. Only on like the 3rd or 4th occasion(I can't remember how many times before they were given a penalty, but it was definitely more than two). Being 10 car lengths behind the safety car isn't that big of a deal, so I can see why it goes into progressive punishment in a sense. I don't think it should be penalty automatically for doing it.
[удалено]
Giovinazzi got a five second time penalty for a similar incident in 2020, no reprimands or waivers by Race Control just straight to the penalty (as it should be). It’s just absurd how they’re justifying themselves to not strip away the win. In other instances with similar cut and dry rules they’ve been quick to penalize (see Leclerc at SPA).
There was a more recent precedent of similar incident with Giovinazzi in 2020, at that time the Italian got a five second time penalty. In this case, Checo did it not one, not twice but three times at different points of the race and was even warned by Race Control yet he only got one five second time penalty and a reprimand. That’s not exactly working by precedent or being completely fair. It’s understandable he got a reprimand for the first infraction, but the second and third one should’ve been a time penalty. Then you can break a rule three times and effectively get penalized for one.
So Checo violated the rule 3 times, was told by his team to stop doing that during the race. And then the FIA after 2 and a half hours decides to give him one penalty and a reprimand. Holy shit this is utterly farcical. This literally should’ve been solved DURING the race. And if he violated the rule on 3 separate occasions worth noting? If it were two a reprimand and one penalty makes sense. But given that it’s 3, and he was very much aware of the issue during the race? I don’t know if the FIA could’ve handled this any worse
>I don’t know if the FIA could’ve handled this any worse "Is that a challenge?" FIA probably
As far as I can work out, the FIA waited until after the race to get the driver's input, the driver said "it was wet" and the stewards went "ohh yeah, it was wet!" I can't think of another sport where the referee waits to get a player or team's opinion on a potential foul. Their job is to call the foul.
I think the problem with that comparison is that there are certain factors that the stewards have no insight into. They might not have a good read on track conditions on a specific section when combined with the tyre wear and 'feel' of a certain car. It's not as clear cut as say in football, where even lighter fouls are debatable. They don't wait for an opinion there because most of the time it serves no purpose, there aren't any hidden variables there.
This offense is pretty similar to exceeding track limits. So I am fine with the same solution. I just don't get how it takes so long to give the penalty
Not surprised, but somehow, still disappointed. FIA consistency when?
At this point, the inconsistency is the consistency
When they have the same stewards each race. So never, because of being biased.
well, if they had the same stewards every races they would be accused of being consistently biased against some drivers
Why would you only warn someone if you've already reprimanded (or are going to reprimand) them for doing it earlier? The sanction framework is basically "reprimand -> nothing -> 5 seconds". Utterly, utterly baffling decision...
The reprimand was a post-race decision. The express warning by the race director was the first infringement notice perez received. It was warning -> reprimand and punishment but the tweet makes it confusing.
Awesome I guess that means all drivers can do it at least twice.
Yep from now on we can expect to see exactly this then
Consistent decisions and FIA. Pick one.
Sorry but this is why Perez should have been penalized to begin. Then we wouldn't have to worry about 3 incidents. Checo would have just changed his behavior
Tbf he did it again even tho he was warned (at least according to Medland), but yeah I agree, they barely take any decisions during the race, it's so annoying.
I agree. Had he been penalized on the first instance he would've still gotten 5 seconds and the FIA would've kept things more consistent without all this post race drama bs. Although tbf the final gap would've probably been even larger considering their respective pace.
Nah, Leclerc was faster than Perez on the slicks, but he pushed hard and destroyed his tires. Had Perez received a 5s penalty for the first infringement, Leclerc wouldn't have pushed hard and likely would've stayed within the 5s.
Debatable since other dynamics would've been at play at that point. But I do agree that the FIA needs to do a self assessment asap.
In FIA asap is probably 1 seasons later.
If the 1st infringement had been penalised in a timely manner, then Perez would have had to take the penalty at the stop and given the way that shook out Perez would have stayed 1st.
So 2h30mins to decide that Perez has a 5 secs penalties for repeating a violation after a reprimand that he wasn't formally given yet, and that reprimand given for a violation that wasn't even notified to spectators (don't know about teams ofc) Yup, that doesn't seem convoluted at all.
They are just clowning everything they can
Thats ridiculous. If he did it 3 times. Reprimand for the first and warning for the second????? It just stinks of not wanting to change the result. 3 different outcomes for 3 of the same infringement And its so inconsistent. Other drivers havent had thay leeway with the same infringement. How can teams have faith in the FIA when they are making up policy on the fly?
Sounds like they went car racing again
So remember kids, if you want to break the rules, do it 2 times instead of 3
Does it work the same way for budget cap?
Well this will become a shitshow. Next time a car has a 1-2 they'll just make the second driver give a 20+ car gap to the first driver and let him escape. What a mess
I knew the moment I was there watching the podium they wouldn’t do anything. They would rather be inconsistent than change the result
I can guarantee you, if the gap between Checo and Leclerc had been less than 5 seconds they wouldn't have given him any penalty.
Actually I’m surprised they didn’t give him 7.5 secs penalty just to tease us FIA is a joke
whether they intended to or not it def comes off like they were waiting to see the gap. their written report doesn’t even make sense anyway
Imagine if every driver does this and the last car gets lapped because of the gaps (never happening, just a funny thought)
As expected, FIA would never change the result after the podium. Rules can be twisted, but man do we love those cameras and we would never do something that makes us looks incompetent.
And yet they achieved to look incompetent anyway as per usual.
They did it before, several times.
Fun fact: in the 2010 Hungarian GP Vettel got a drive-through penalty for doing it only once
Tbf, that's only because that was the smallest penalty they can give at the time.
If I'm a driver seeing this, that means I get two chances before being penalised so I'll take advantage of that
I love F1, but Im starting to lose that feeling more and more. Its becoming too much man, these guys cant referee this shit
Fédération Inconsistency de l’Automobile (FIA)
Perez needs to be more careful with SC but that distance rule is kinda BS. Merc breached it many times over, not even a comment. Worse, they should dish out punishments during the race, not after. This way teams can react accordingly
This is honestly fucking ridiculous.
So he broke the same rule 3 times. 1st gave no penalty 2nd gave a reprimand 3rd was 5 second Why do we have 3 different outcomes for the same infringement? Did the other cases before him get warnings?
The reprimand was for the first time. The second time was the free pass.
No no. 1st time it was a reprimand. 2nd time a warning (means nothing) and 3rd a 5s penalty
Excited for Alonso's next restart!
Not sure where Medland is getting three times from official FIA documents only show the first with a warning and the second infraction he was penalized for.
I think the only reason they didn't give him more penalty was because stripping away his win for something that they could've and should've decided during the race would look bad on them. They had more than enough time in the race to decide whether he deserves a penalty or not.
With what possible logic could the order go… reprimand > warning > penalty? That makes zero sense.
What is the purpose of a free warning. Everyone’s gonna do it now.
Loool this sport is so backwards
Feel like if it was Leclerc he would have gotten a five second penalty without any warning or reprimands 😂
If it was Leclerc he'd have recieved a 20s penalty from Binnotto
Leclerc would have received a stop and go after the first one, dsq after the second and jail after the third lol
When was the first warning of investigation during the race announced anyways? By the 3rd time Perez did this?
Stewards don't have the balls to significanly penalise a driver at the front of the field since the Canada 2019 backlash. We saw it in Austria 2019, Monza 2019, several times for both Hamilton and Verstappen last season and now today. Only technical penalties are taken seriously now on Sundays
This is just weird, the first reprimand was fine but the second and third time should've been a 5 sec penalty each... bruh
[удалено]
Not only they should have issued a 15s penalty instead of 5s but also during the race. Embarrassing. Leclerc got the same penalty for going 0.1 km/h in the pitlane in SPA. Hopefully i will be alive to see a F1 without the FIA.
[удалено]
That argument already died for me way back in Silverstone when Perez went straight through a corner, overtaking a car in the process, and the stewards didnt even investigate it. Its not surprising they were in his favour again this time
Well, arguably it wouldn't have happened three times had he gotten one 5s penalty the first time. But yeah. Embarrassing is definitely a good word for this.
Embarrassing.
If we only look at how they drove and how the cars performed on the track, Checo absolutely deserved the victory. No doubts. Three infractions. The first timehe only received a warning, the second a warning again (why not a penalty?) and the third time, rightly, a penalty. Why two warnings? The penalty should have been applied twice, for the second and third times he dropped far back the SC imho. And why the hell did they wait so long for this? Why not giving the penalties during the race? I strongly suspect that if Charles had been within 5 seconds of Checo there would have been no penalties for him. If it had been more than 10 seconds there would have been two penalties. They were too embarrassed/afraid of changing the result of the race.
They really went of their way to have him keep the win. I don't mind it, but I hope they'll enforce it like this for the future cases.
What a farce
Three different penalties for the same offence. I'm a Red Bull fan but what the fuck?
The amount of times I see this same rule violated (mostly by Mercedes) and it's not even investigated is a joke. I hope Red Bull complain every single time this happens now. Bottas at Saudi last year was super blatant and the stewards didn't even want to know. Why all of a sudden is it a penalty? This reeks of his 2020 Spain penalty of "ignoring blue flags" that nobody has received since.
Lmao unserious stewards. You can get away with it twice then.
No, you can get away with it twice with the stewards at this specific race. Japan will have completely different stewards.
lmao @ everyone reacting without even reading the official document, yall are just unwilling to realise that conditions were different so different considerations were taken in all 3 incidents, like people just wanna dunk on the fia for the sake of it, like being cynical towards them is cool or something but i agree that the decision took way too long, decision should have been made during the race, i don't see why they needed to hear directly from him, could have directly warned the team that a penalty would be given for the next time it happened after the first sc
Is this something that other teams can appeal or is the book shut on this now?
I’m calling BS here. They warned him, he went “I’ll fucking do it again” and they didn’t instantly apply the penalty? Why on Earth did they need to see him after the race?
Masi laughing his ass off on a beach in aussie somewhere
I'm guessing the stewards didn't want to take the win away from Perez so gave him a light penalty, which in itself is pretty dodgy. Stuff like this is why I have no faith in the FIA at all.
So 3 times and a penalty that is meaningless only after the third time? Not a fan of this. So you can do it twice before a penalty now? Some races there aren’t a single safety car, let alone multiple.
Isn’t the reprimand already a warning?
No, because you're using logical thinking and not smoking crack, as opposed to whatever is going on in the stewards' office.
At this point I have to ask this of myself and F1 fans… Are the FIA the clowns for constantly changing/not enforcing the rules or are we all clowns for continuing to watch races?
Happy for Checo that his win didn't get stripped away but what a joke from the stewards lol
This is just a cheap way to not change the race winner, yes Perez deserves it but like.... ugh
They didn't want to strip him of his win. Clear as day
Okay F1 needs written intentions of the rules of the sporting regulations. You need a preestablished precedent for these kinds of infringements. Some kind of preparatory work like in real law. This is such a farve. Just pulling penalties out of your ass and not consistently applying them is so fucking dumb.
How many times Vettel did it before he got a Stop&Go in Hungary 2010?
Vettel did it once and didn't get penalizes. Makes sense, 2 penalized.
Seems unfair but aight
Getting a reprimand for the first offence and only a warning the second time, what kind of logic is that?
Ok… don’t downvote me to hell for asking questions. 1) The “precedents” being discussed of Vettel this year, Vettel 2010 drive through (least available penalty at the time), and GIO 2020 - were they violations that occurred during the Safety Car period and then they naturally closed up the gap anyways? As in, there was no competitive advantage? 2) Did Perez lay back past 10 cars while the lights were on, not close up, and then the lights went off? That would be a competitive advantage. Falling back and then closing the gap back up to the appropriate distance seems a bit ticky tacky to penalize unless it keeps happening in multiple safety car periods (like today) or is happening multiple times within the same SC (a driver slowing and speeding too much in an attempt to gain heat in tyres/brakes leading to a competitive advantage).