The aftermath of the Miami Grand Prix continues to generate debate, particularly regarding the late-race incident involving Charles Leclerc. While the Ferrari driver initially took responsibility for the costly spin that compromised his result, former Formula 1 driver Ivan Capelli has offered a very different interpretation, suggesting that a technical issue on the SF-26 may have been the real cause.
Speaking in a detailed post-race analysis, Ivan Capelli revisited the decisive moment in which Charles Leclerc lost control while battling for a potential podium finish. According to the Italian, the dynamics of the incident strongly indicate that the problem originated from the car itself rather than from driver input.
Strong early pace undone in the closing stages
Charles Leclerc had built his Miami race on a solid foundation, delivering an excellent start and managing his pace effectively in the opening phase. For several laps, he was able to create a buffer to the cars behind, maximizing the potential of the Ferrari package despite its well-documented limitations in straight-line speed.
However, as the race progressed, the inherent performance deficit of the SF-26 became increasingly evident. Rivals equipped with Mercedes power units, along with other front-running competitors, gradually closed the gap, forcing Ferrari into a defensive strategy.
The pressure intensified in the final stint, when Oscar Piastri rapidly reduced the distance to Charles Leclerc. At that stage, the Ferrari driver was fully focused on protecting track position and securing a valuable podium result under difficult circumstances.
The decisive moment: spin and its consequences
The turning point came in the closing laps, when Charles Leclerc suddenly lost control of his car on corner exit. The spin not only ended his chances of fighting back but also left his Ferrari with visible damage, particularly to the front suspension area.
This sequence of events opened the door for both George Russell and Max Verstappen to overtake, dramatically altering the outcome of the race. A subsequent penalty further dropped Charles Leclerc down the order, leaving him classified only eighth at the chequered flag — a disappointing result considering his earlier performance.
Ivan Capelli’s analysis: signs of a technical failure
Although Charles Leclerc publicly attributed the incident to his own mistake, Ivan Capelli expressed strong doubts about that interpretation. In his view, the way the car behaved was inconsistent with a typical driver error.
Capelli explained that the loss of control appeared gradual rather than sudden, pointing toward a progressive oversteer condition. Such behavior, he suggested, is often linked to a sudden drop in rear aerodynamic load or a mechanical imbalance, rather than an isolated driving misjudgment.
He further highlighted specific visual cues from the onboard footage, noting that Charles Leclerc appeared to apply an unusually sharp steering correction at a later corner. This detail, according to the former Formula 1 driver, could indicate an issue with the right-rear suspension, potentially causing the car to sit unevenly and respond unpredictably to steering inputs.
From a technical standpoint, Capelli emphasized that when a car’s rear geometry or suspension integrity is compromised, the driver effectively loses the ability to control direction with precision. In such conditions, even a highly experienced driver like Charles Leclerc would be unable to prevent a spin.
Driver instinct vs mechanical limitation
Expanding on his analysis, Ivan Capelli suggested that while minor lapses in concentration can occur in Formula 1, the circumstances in Miami did not align with a typical driver mistake scenario. After completing more than 50 laps through the same corner without issue, it would be highly unusual for Charles Leclerc to suddenly lose control in such a manner without an underlying cause.
Capelli’s interpretation reinforces a broader narrative surrounding Ferrari’s current technical challenges. The SF-26 has already faced scrutiny for its performance limitations, particularly in terms of power unit output and overall balance. If a mechanical fault did indeed contribute to the incident, it would further underline the need for reliability and consistency improvements.
Implications for Ferrari and Lewis Hamilton
The situation also adds another layer of complexity for Ferrari as it continues to evaluate the feedback of both Charles Leclerc and Lewis Hamilton. The seven-time world champion has repeatedly pointed to limitations in performance, particularly regarding engine power, and incidents like the one in Miami only intensify concerns about the car’s overall package.
For the Maranello team, understanding whether Charles Leclerc’s spin was caused by driver input or mechanical failure is crucial. It not only affects internal assessments but also shapes development priorities as the team looks to close the gap to its rivals in the ongoing Formula 1 season.
Ivan Capelli’s analysis therefore offers a compelling alternative perspective, suggesting that the narrative of driver error may be overly simplistic. If confirmed, the incident could serve as further evidence that Ferrari’s challenges extend beyond pure pace, encompassing reliability and technical consistency — key areas that must be addressed if the team aims to return to consistent podium contention.
Leave a Reply