Ferrari vs FIA: this in a nutshell is the appeal that the historic team from Maranello has made against the international federation. The “crime” concerns the standing start in which Carlos Sainz and Fernando Alonso came into contact during the final stages of the 2023 Formula Australian Grand Prix at the Albert Park circuit.
Fernando Alonso lost control of his car, but luckily he did not sustain any fatal damage to the car. An element that allowed him to resume the race taking advantage of yet another stop due to the bad crash between the two Alpines, being able to recover third place in the subsequent restart under the Safety Car.
Now. We can certainly say that the race stewards have shown an often absent decision-making speed. In short, they wasted no time, relegating the Ferrari driver to twelfth position through the 5-second penalty imposed on number 55. The issue was not accepted at all by the Spanish driver, who expressed his displeasure with several complaints via radio, subsequently submerged in the usual interviews after the race.
Ferrari defended Carlos. The position of Frederic Vasseur and his companions does not deviate, therefore, from that expressed hot by the Spaniard. The Prancing Horse, who could not count on Charles Leclerc at the Albert Park circuit due to the first lap incident at turn 3 with Lance Stroll, has decided not to accept this double zero in terms of points. Therefore the Maranello team appealed to the FIA with some theoretically “enlightening” new evidence that could allow Ferrari to cancel the punishment.
Show your support for Scuderia Ferrari with official merchandise collection! Click here to enter the F1 online Store and shop securely! And also get your F1 tickets for every race with VIP hospitality and unparalleled insider access. Click here for the best offers to support Charles and Carlos from the track!
Through article 14.1.1 of the international sporting code, a request for revision was thus initiated, although the regulation clearly specifies that such a sanction is absolutely unappealable. In doing so, the Italian argument must necessarily include new relevant elements which, if judged as such, could in some way modify the opinion of the Australian “arbitration board”.
Formula One Technical Analysis expressed its opinion through the on-board analysis and subsequent articles, defining the penalty inflicted on number 55 as “not scandalous”. The fact remains that, two laps from the end, the race stewards could have studied the case with more calm and make a decision in the following hours so as not to leave anything to chance, as they say in these situations.
Is a lightning investigation the best option in this case? Are the results incorrect in relation to the penalty inflicted on the Ferrari driver? Was “saving” Fernando Alonso’s race ready to retire and maintaining the penalty on Madrid after the last red flag correct? All these are questions to which, frankly, giving a clear answer is quite complicated.
Does Ferrari defend itself with telemetry?
Below we examine the telemetric data of the second restart. The section in question goes from the finish line to the first corner, where Carlos Sainz hit Fernando Alonso, temporarily putting him out of action. Through the graphics provided by the editorial staff of Formula One Technical Analysis, we can observe the data relating to the brake and accelerator of the two cars in question: SF-23 vs AMR23.
Through the study of the on board we could be deceived by the images, while the telemetric data allows Formula One Technical Analysis to verify the behavior of the single-seaters factually. The line inherent in the throttle of the two-time F1 world champion reveals how Fernando Alonso lifts his foot from the pedal a few meters later in turn 1, remaining flat out for a few tenths of a second longer. On the contrary, Carlos Sainz adopts a more cautious approach, releasing the accelerator in an early manner.
By reflex, the Spaniard starts braking ahead of time trying to lower the speed he was carrying in the middle of the corner. Fernando’s approach to 1 was not influenced by Lewis Hamilton, but rather we are talking about a choice made a priori. Also because, at the moment of braking, the two were practically side by side, not one in front of the other, as can be seen in the following image.
The telemetric data doesn’t lie and in fact they are correct if we take into consideration that Carlos and Fernando had two very different positions as they approached the first corner. The Ferrari man was on the right, while his compatriot, further to the left, benefited from an easier trajectory in tackling the first chicane.
On the sidelines of the incident we do not look at the graphics relating to the previous lap, as each lap has its own history and, strictly speaking, lengthening a braking point to prevent an opponent from attacking as the forty-one year old from Oviedo did is more than normal. At the same time, however, Carlos’s more conservative approach to avoiding contact emerges clearly.
Making a judgment on the facts therefore remains very complicated. Considering the full story and keeping in mind the operating mode of the International Federation in disputes of this kind, it seems rather difficult to think that the race direction can cancel the 5 second penalty.
Leave a Reply