FIA contradictions: Lewis Hamilton penalized for the wrong reason
Lewis Hamilton was handed a five-second time penalty at the Singapore Grand Prix for repeatedly cutting the Marina Bay corners. Yet the incident had an extraordinary cause: a serious brake failure that forced the Ferrari driver to leave the track several times in order to safely control his car.
During the final two laps of the race, Hamilton struggled with a critical braking issue that made it impossible to stop the car properly. As a result, he ran wide on numerous occasions, crossing the track limits repeatedly and even receiving a black-and-white warning flag. Despite the issue, he managed to finish just 0.4 seconds ahead of Fernando Alonso at the chequered flag.
Immediately after the race, Lewis Hamilton, accompanied by Ferrari sporting director Diego Ioverno, was summoned by the FIA stewards for breaching Article 33.3 of the Formula 1 Sporting Regulations—leaving the track without a justifiable reason—and Article 12.2.1 i of the International Sporting Code, referring to Note 21.1 from the race director. The meeting aimed to clarify whether the driver’s actions were justified given the mechanical fault.
Hamilton explained that he was managing a safety emergency and trying to avoid a complete brake failure, citing “force majeure” as the reason for his off-track excursions. Ferrari backed him with telemetry data, onboard video, and radio messages proving that the car suffered from a genuine braking issue. The stewards acknowledged the fault but ultimately concluded that it did not qualify as a “justifiable reason” under the Driving Standards Guidelines. Consequently, they applied the standard penalty for multiple track limits infringements—five seconds added to the final race time. The decision was issued within an hour of the race’s conclusion and was not contested by either Hamilton or the team.
The FIA’s official statement read: “The driver left the track on multiple occasions while managing a brake problem. However, after further investigation, the stewards determined that this was not a justifiable reason and applied the usual penalty. The decision was not contested by the team or the driver.”
For the FIA, leaving the track means gaining an advantage – but Lewis Hamilton was the slowest car on track
Under FIA regulations, when a car crosses the white line with all four wheels, it is considered a violation of track limits—even if the driver gains no advantage. However, in this case, the situation was quite the opposite. Hamilton lost significant time due to the brake issue, so much so that Alonso was able to close the gap dramatically. The British driver was clearly struggling just to finish the race safely.
Despite recognizing the brake failure as a case of “force majeure,” the stewards still ruled that Hamilton had left the track without a valid reason. But that raises a crucial question: if the officials acknowledged that Hamilton’s car suffered a severe mechanical problem that could have been dangerous for him and for others, why didn’t they show the black flag with an orange circle, which obliges a driver to pit for safety reasons?
Had the FIA done that, Hamilton would have been forced to stop—either for an emergency pit stop or to retire in one of the circuit’s escape roads. In both cases, it would have meant the end of his race. Instead, they chose to penalize him after the chequered flag, creating yet another example of inconsistency in how the regulations are applied.
The cases of Lando Norris and Kevin Magnussen show the FIA’s inconsistency
Since the controversial finale of Abu Dhabi 2021, the FIA’s rulebook has often looked like a confusing maze of contradictory clauses—difficult to interpret not just for fans, but even for professionals within the sport. The Singapore Grand Prix provided yet another example of that inconsistency.
McLaren driver Lando Norris completed the entire race with a visibly damaged front wing endplate after contact with Max Verstappen’s Red Bull on the opening lap. Despite the broken part, the stewards—likely reassured by McLaren’s engineers—chose not to issue the black flag with the orange circle, allowing Norris to continue without interruption.
However, a nearly identical situation involving Kevin Magnussen occurred three years ago, also in Singapore. The Haas driver suffered the same kind of damage to his front wing, although in his case, the endplate was even more open and unstable. On that occasion, the stewards decided to show the black flag with the orange circle, forcing the Danish driver to return to the pits for repairs.
In three recent cases involving car damage, only one driver was spared intervention. Lando Norris was allowed to continue despite a visibly damaged front wing; Kevin Magnussen was ordered to pit under the black-and-orange flag; and Lewis Hamilton was given a five-second penalty for repeatedly crossing track limits caused by a mechanical failure—a situation that, despite being extremely dangerous, was handled safely and professionally by the British driver.
It’s hard not to see the irony. The FIA seems to interpret its own regulations differently depending on the situation, creating confusion for teams, drivers, and fans alike. The rulebook, filled with contradictions and loopholes, has become nearly impossible to understand. As many in the paddock often remark, whoever writes these regulations will always be right—while the rest of us, left baffled, will always be wrong.
Leave a Reply