FIA rejects Vettel Mexican GP penalty review

Saturday 12th November, 2016 - 9:14pm


Sebastian Vettel looks set to keep fourth after FIA declined to review the Mexican Grand Prix penalty

Sebastian Vettel looks set to keep fourth after FIA declined to review the Mexican Grand Prix penalty

The FIA has rejected Ferrari’s request to review the post-race penalty Sebastian Vettel received for moving under braking at the Mexican Grand Prix.

The Scuderia asked the sport’s governing body to review the decision after submitting new GPS data to warrant a fresh investigation.

Vettel initially finished fourth on the road before being promoted to the podium after Red Bull’s Max Verstappen was issued a time penalty for cutting the Turn 1 chicane.

However, the Ferrari driver lost third place after stewards imposed a 10 second post-race penalty for “potentially dangerous driving” while defending his position from Daniel Ricciardo in the final laps.

After consulting with stewards from the Mexican Grand Prix, the FIA has declared there are no grounds for a review.

“Scuderia Ferrari argued in its written submission that the “new element”, in accordance with Article 14.1, existed. In its verbal submissions it also argued that there were two “new elements”, read a statement from the FIA.

“Specifically the Scuderia argued that the Race Director, pursuant to Article 27.4 of the FIA Formula One Sporting Regulations, had the “power” to instruct the driver of Car 33 Max Verstappen, to give back the alleged advantage he had gained when leaving the track on a previous lap to that of the incident involving Car 5 and Car 3 driven by Daniel Ricciardo.

“Scuderia Ferrari also argued that the GPS data it presented was a “new element”. The Stewards heard extensive verbal submission and argument for all parties.

“In relation to the matter of the Race Director having the “power” to instruct the driver of Car 33 to give back the alleged advantage, we note firstly that the relevant article gives the Race Director

“absolute authority” to allow the driver to give back a position.

“It does not imply an obligation to do so. The fact that the Race Director did not exercise his discretion is not relevant to the decision taken in Document 38.

“In relation to the GPS data, we note that this data is available to teams during the race. It is also available to, and referred to by, the stewards, in the Stewards Room during the race.

“When asked if the GPS data in any way contradicted the telemetry and other evidence that the Stewards concluded showed that the driver of Car 5 had steered whilst under braking at Turn 4, Mr Clear conceded that it did not.

“Article 14.2 of the International Sporting Code gives the Stewards the sole discretion to determine if a new element exists. Having received all the written and verbal submissions and carefully considered them, the Stewards decide there is no new element.”