Formula 1
Formula 1
25 Jun
-
28 Jun
FP1 in
77 days
02 Jul
-
05 Jul
FP1 in
84 days
16 Jul
-
19 Jul
FP1 in
98 days
R
Hungarian GP
30 Jul
-
02 Aug
FP1 in
112 days
27 Aug
-
30 Aug
FP1 in
140 days
03 Sep
-
06 Sep
FP1 in
147 days
R
Singapore GP
17 Sep
-
20 Sep
FP1 in
161 days
24 Sep
-
27 Sep
FP1 in
168 days
R
United States GP
22 Oct
-
25 Oct
FP1 in
196 days
29 Oct
-
01 Nov
FP1 in
203 days
R
Brazilian GP
12 Nov
-
15 Nov
FP1 in
217 days
R
Abu Dhabi GP
26 Nov
-
29 Nov
FP1 in
231 days

FIA rejects Ferrari’s Vettel Mexican GP review case

shares
comments
FIA rejects Ferrari’s Vettel Mexican GP review case
By:
Nov 11, 2016, 9:51 PM

The FIA has rejected Ferrari’s call to review Sebastian Vettel’s penalty for moving under braking at the Mexican Grand Prix.

Sebastian Vettel, Ferrari SF16-H
Sebastian Vettel, Ferrari SF16-H waves to the crowd at the end of the race
Sebastian Vettel, Ferrari SF16-H
Sebastian Vettel, Ferrari on the grid
Sebastian Vettel, Ferrari SF16-H
Sebastian Vettel, Ferrari SF16-H
Sebastian Vettel, Ferrari SF16-H
Podium: third place Daniel Ricciardo, Red Bull Racing with Max Verstappen, Red Bull Racing

Ferrari claimed that GPS data it submitted to the governing body was a new element and justified a fresh investigation into the incident between Vettel and Daniel Ricciardo in the closing stages in Mexico City.

Had Ferrari’s claims been successful and the stewards’ decision overturned, then there was a chance for Vettel to regain the third position that he lost.

However, following a teleconference call on Friday between the stewards who were present in Mexico, it was determined that Ferrari’s GPS data was nothing new.

No new element

In a statement issued by the FIA, it said: “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”.

“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.”

Ferrari has the right to appeal the matter.

Next article
Ferrari and Red Bull Mexico fallout the ideal cover for Nico Rosberg in Brazilian GP

Previous article

Ferrari and Red Bull Mexico fallout the ideal cover for Nico Rosberg in Brazilian GP

Next article

Ecclestone says Brazilian and German GPs under threat for 2017

Ecclestone says Brazilian and German GPs under threat for 2017
Load comments